LAWS(J&K)-2013-8-14

SOFI AND COMPANY Vs. INDIA TOURISM

Decided On August 16, 2013
Sofi And Company Appellant
V/S
India Tourism Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application filed under Section 11 of the J&K Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1997(for brevity the Act) with a prayer to appoint an independent arbitrator.

(2.) A contract for construction of Indian Institute of Skiing and Mountaineering at Gulmarg was awarded in terms of work order dated 05.08.2004 in favour of the petitioner. It is claimed that the work was completed on 03.06.2008 and final bills were submitted on 06.08.2006, however, the accounts could not be settled. On the basis of arbitration clause 48 of the contract agreement the petitioner sent letter No. 2408 dated 05.05.2011. The dispute was referred to the sole arbitration of one Shri Lachhman Singh with a request to enter the reference and decide the same as per the provisions of the Act. The case of the petitioner is that they sent an intimation to the arbitrator on 21.07.2011 and 10.08.2011 that no communication has been received from him with regard to arbitration proceedings which was followed by a legal notice dated 04.12.2011 (Annexure D). It was still followed by many other communications.

(3.) 04.2011 had invoked clause 48 of the General conditions of contracts and Standard Contract Forms, which provide for arbitration (Annexure R1 and R2). On 18.08.2011 the arbitrator had issued a letter to the petitioner asking it to submit its claim on or before 16.09.2011. Subsequently on 06.02.2012 the arbitrator sent another letter indicating that earlier he could not take up the reference on account of serious illness of his wife who ultimately expired on 10.01.2012. Accordingly he issued a notice of preliminary hearing for 24.02.2012 in ITDCs office at Room No. 419, Core-8, Scope Complex, Lodi Road, New Delhi. 4. The aforesaid pleadings of the parties clarify two facts; (a)that arbitrator in terms of clause 48 was appointed on 05.05.2011 which is conceded by the petitioner (Annexure R-3); (b) he has also entered the reference. The petitioner conceded that it has received communication dated 06.02.2012 but has not received communication dated 09.08.2011.