JAGDISH CHAND GUPTA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is before this Court in this petition under Sec. 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act'), seeking for appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute that has arisen between the parties.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner, who is a Government Contractor, that there was an agreement (Annexure P-2), between the petitioner and the respondents and accordingly a contract was entered into between the parties in respect of work "providing Sewerage System to Solan Town (SH: Improvement and Up gradation of 2.90 MLD STP by Designing and Supplying and Fixing of Tube settler in the existing clarifier of Sewerage Treatment Plan Solan in Tehsil and Distt. Solan, H.P. The expenditure to be incurred for completion of the aforesaid work was approximately to the tune of Rs.5,40,11,453.00.On the award of the work, the contractor disputed his infrastructure and manpower at the site of the work. The work was to be completed on or before 14/3/2017, however the same was actually completed on 27/7/2019. The petitioner cited various reasons for delay in completion of work which were accepted by the Department and he was granted extension up to 31/8/2019 to complete the aforesaid work. After completion of the work, the petitioner raised demand for the amount due including escalation, difference in GST, payment for extra works, prolongation damages and final bill. Since the payments were not released, the petitioner was left with no other remedy but to invoke arbitration clause for redressal of his grievances. Clause 25 of the Agreement provides for appointment of an Arbitrator.

(3.) Notice of the petition was served upon the respondents. However, they did not file reply to the petition, but the learned Additional Advocate General submits that he has no objection, if an Arbitrator is appointed.