ANAND BHATIA Vs. R M RIICO AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is preferred for appointment of an Arbitrator as per sub-section(6) of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1996").

(2.) The facts necessary to be noticed for adjudication of this application are that the applicant is a proprietorship firm and is "B" class contractor. The Rajasthan Industrial Investment Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "RIICO") by a notice invited tenders for construction of roads and certain other ancillary works in the industrial area at Pokaran in District Jaisalmer. The tender submitted by the applicant firm was accepted and the work was allotted to it on execution of an agreement dated 8.1.1993. As per the agreement, the work assigned was to be commenced on 18.1.1993 and was to be completed on or before 17.1.1994. Clause 80 of the agreement provides for resolution of dispute between the parties to agreement by way of arbitration and that reads as under:-

(3.) During the course of the term of agreement certain disputes arose between the parties and, therefore, the applicant firm by a notice dated 27.12.1993 made a request for appointment of arbitrators as per clause 80 of the agreement. On being failed to get the arbitrator appointed amicably, the applicant submitted an application before the court of learned District Judge, Jodhpur as per Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act of 1940") and that came to be accepted by an order dated 15.2.1995. Learned District Judge ordered for appointment of the arbitrators as per clause 80 of the agreement within a period of one month from the date of order. The RIICO appointed Shri N.P.Mathur, retired Chief Engineer, Public Works Department, Jaipur as its nominee by a letter dated 7.10.1995. The applicant nominated Shri A.R.Bhandari as co-arbitrator. It appears that the nominated arbitrators failed to get the umpire nominated, hence delay occurred in arbitral proceedings. The arbitrator nominated by RIICO at the same time insisted upon the applicant to submit statement of facts and claims. He also conveyed that in the event of failure to submit the claim he shall proceed with the matter and pass the award. An application in these circumstances was filed before the District Judge, Jodhpur by the applicant for appointment of a sole arbitrator by the court itself. The court by an interim order dated 20.5.1997 stayed the arbitral proceedings before Shri N.P.Mathur, the arbitrator appointed by the RIICO. The application ultimately came to be rejected vide order dated 20.7.1998. After dismissal of the application the arbitrator nominated by the RIICO submitted his award with entire record of proceedings to the District Judge, Jodhpur on 3.8.1998. The arbitrator mentioned that he as a matter of fact signed the award on 20.5.1998 itself but not dispatched the same due to the interim order dated 20.5.1997. No subsequent steps have yet been taken upon the award passed by the nominated arbitrator of the RIICO. The applicant in the meanwhile made a request for appointment of Shri S.R.Sharma, retired District Judge as arbitrator on its behalf. A request was also made to nominate an arbitrator on behalf of the RIICO. On being failed to get any response, this application is preferred as per Section 11 of the Act of 1996.