LADAKH ROAD LINES Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant abovenamed has filed the instant petition under Section 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1996") against the judgment and order dated 09.11.2020 passed by the learned Commercial Court (Additional District Judge), Jammu hereinafter referred to as the "Commercial Court") whereby the petition of the appellant/petitioner filed under Section 9 of the Act has been dismissed.

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to filing of this appeal are that on 21.08.2020, Jammu and Kashmir Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "JKRTC") through its Managing Director invited e-tender vide its Notice No. JKRTC/GML/CHT/2020- 22/KMR/359 for supply of Trucks (HCVs/LCVs) for various Stations of Kashmir province, for two years viz. for the years 2020-2022. The bidding process was through online mode and the technical bids were to be opened on 09.09.2020 at 2:00 p.m. Certain conditions with regard to eligibility were prescribed in the tender notice and the bidders were required to upload the requisite documents along with their offers. It appears that the appellant/petitioner as well as respondent No.9 herein responded to the aforesaid tender notice and submitted their offers online. JKRTC, after finding that the appellant/petitioner as well as respondent No.9 have qualified the technical bid, opened the financial bid, whereafter contract in respect of Clusters bearing Code K-1 to K4 was allotted in favour of respondent No.9, whereas contract in respect of Clusters bearing Code K-5 and K-6 was allotted to New J&K Roadways, Srinagar. Allotment of contract in respect of Cluster K-7 was made in favour of appellant/petitioner.

(3.) According to the appellant/petitioner, respondent No.9 was not eligible to participate in the bidding process as it was not a registered transport firm. It is averred that respondent No.9 had not uploaded the requisite documents along with its offer. On this ground, it is urged that allotment of contract in favour of respondent No.9 is not in accordance with law. It is pertinent to mention here that the tender document contains an arbitration clause which reads as under: