SINGHAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY BHARATPUR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above application was filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the Act), for appointment of an Arbitrator.

(2.) THE applicant is a partnership firm having its principal place of business at Bharatpur. THE applicant entered into a contract with the non - applicant No. 1 State for construction of road from Jhalera to Alipura in Hindaun Division under the Contract No. 167/95-96 and the estimated cost of construction was Rs. 12,89,852/ -. A copy of the Agreement has been filed and marked as Annex. 1. According to the applicant, the firm started the work under the contract aforesaid and the work even continued beyond the originally agreed period for the reason attributable to the State and for the reasons beyond the control of the applicant. THE period for completion of work was extended upto 12. 12. 97. THE applicant submitted the final bill to the non- applicant in the sum of Rs. 11,00,156/- vide letter dated, 17. 4. 1998. Despite reminders, the payment was not made. Invoking Clause 23 of the agreement, the applicant firm served a notice dated. 10. 5. 2000 on the State and requested for referring the dispute to the High Power Standing Committee within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the application, but it was not done so.

(3.) FROM a plain reading of Sec. 11 of the Act, there are essentially three methods to secure the appointment of an Arbitrator; (i) Parties may agree for a procedure for appointment of Arbitrators; (ii) If the parties do not reach such an agreement, sub-sec. (3) provides a mechanism for appointing the three member Arbiter without the request made to the Chief Justice or any person or institution designated by him. iii) Sub-sections (4), (5) and (6) of the Act provide for appointment of an Arbitrator or Arbitrators, if the circumstances set out therein,by the Chief Justice, or person or institution designated by him.