KULDIP CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through this petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1996 Act"), a prayer has been made to appoint/nominate an independent person as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes/differences between the petitioner and the respondents arising out of the work contract No.CA NO. GE/JAL (W) 27/17-18 of 2017-18 i.e. Provision of Certain repairs to Buildings of 27 AD Regt., 167 Med. Regt., 62 Engr. Regt. and 987 AD Jalandhar. It will be noted here that existence of the arbitration clause in the agreement is not in dispute. The respondent had issued general conditions of the contract which contained the arbitration clause. Clause 70 of the general conditions of the contract read as under:-

(2.) The petitioner was awarded civil construction work which is claimed to have been completed, however, the entire amount thereof has not been released. A request for appointment of an Arbitrator, submitted on 07.02.2020, has failed to invoke any positive response.

(3.) In any case, now, on or after 23.10.2015, a party to the contract does not have right to act as an Arbitrator or nominate an Arbitrator. On notice of motion, Mr. Praveen Chander Goyal, Advocate, has entered appearance on behalf of the respondents.