HARYANA VIDYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD Vs. ARYA NIRMAN ENGINEERS CONSULTANTS CONTRACTORS AND GENERAL ORDER SUPPLIERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present revision petition has been filed against the order dated 9.11.2005 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Panchkula acting as Designated Authority, vide which he appointed Shri P.P.Bajaj, Chief Engineer, Punjab Health Systems Corporation, SCO no.126-127, Sector 8, Chandigarh, as Arbitrator to settle the dispute between the parties.

(2.) It is not in dispute that the respondent herein was allotted work on 8.3.2001 and said work was completed on 18.2.2002. The case of the petitioner is that the work was not completed within the stipulated period and that full and final payment was made on 16.11.2003. After the receipt of the payment respondent made a representation on 5.11.2006 for the appointment of an Arbitrator to decide the dispute in terms of the agreement. As no action was taken on the said representation within a period of 30 days from the date of the said request an application was moved for the appointment of an Arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the Act). The Designated Authority adjudicated the matter and came to the conclusion that the petitioner was entitled to appointment of Arbitrator in view of the agreement as alleged and also held that the petition was within a period of limitation.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the said order primarily on the ground that as envisaged under Clause 25-A of the Agreement was not adhered to it was not open for the Court to appoint an Arbitrator.