GURDIAL SINGH @ CO. BUILDERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRESENT is the petition for appointment of an Arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the 'Act').

(2.) THE Petitioner was awarded a contract number CBUZ -20/88 -89 for providing of Additional single accommodation for airman at Pathankot. The Agreement executed in pursuance of such award of contract is governed by General Conditions of Contract (IAFW -2249) Clause 70 contains terms of adjudication of dispute between the parties by an Arbitrator. Such disputes between parties were referred for adjudication to Shri B. M Gupta, Chief Engineer, as a sole Arbitrator. Shri Gupta announced his Award dated 13.10.993. But the said Award was set aside by the Civil Court on 21.3.1995 when an application filed by the Respondents for making such Award as rule of the Court was dismissed. The objections filed by the Petitioner herein against the said Award were also dismissed. Such order passed by learned trial Court was affirmed by learned first Appellate Court on 2.6.1998. Learned Civil Court has found that learned Arbitrator has announced its Award beyond the period prescribed in law. It may be noticed that the orders of the Civil Court are not to supersede the arbitration Agreement or remitting the matter back to the Arbitrator for re -decision.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the Petitioner has vehemently argued that since the arbitration Agreement was not superseded nor the dispute remitted back to an Arbitrator by the Civil Court, therefore, the Arbitrator is required to be appointed by this Court under Section 11(6) of the Act. Reliance is placed upon the judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court rendered in Juggilal v. General Fibre Dealers : AIR 1962 SC 1123, wherein it has been held that the further arbitration can take place, when the Civil Court has not decided to supersede the reference and the agreement subsists. It was held to the following effect: -