SOOD AND SOOD Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Construction of OTM accommodation at Kupwara, Srinagar was allotted to the Petitioner vide agreement CA No. CESZ-6/89-90. Due to the militancy in Kashmir valley, there was delay in execution of work as a result of which, the said contract was cancelled vide letter No. 180258/159/E8 dt. 15th of Jan 1991. On account of this cancellation of the contract, dispute was raised by the Petitioner by invoking Clause 70 of IAFW-2249. Having failed to persuade the Respondents to refer the matter to the arbitrator, Petitioner sought intervention of this Court by filing a petition under Section 20 of the J. & K. Arbitration Act, Svt. 2002, bearing AA No. 89/92.

(2.) On notice being issued by this Court, objections were filed by the Respondents to the above petition filed by the Petitioner. It was contended in the objections that the recovery against the Petitioner was raised on account of his failure to execute the work allotted to him. The claim raised by the Petitioner was denied by the Respondents.

(3.) It be noted that on 17th of Nov. 1995, counsel for the Respondents made a statement that some arbitrator has been appointed by the department in terms of the agreement. Vide order dt. 9th of Dec. 1998, this Court observed that the Respondents had not taken the Court into confidence as to whether the arbitrator has been appointed or not. It was only on 19th of May 1999, that the then learned Counsel appearing for Respondents filed a communication dated 24th of April 1999, informing the Court that arbitrator has been appointed.