Full Text
ARB.P. 188/2025
Date of Decision: 20.03.2025 IN THE MATTER OF:
RAILFAB TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD .....Petitioner
Through: Mr.Shyam Sunder Gangwar, Advocate.
Through: Mr.Mridul Jain, SPC
Superintendent.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV
JUDGEMENT
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL)
JUDGMENT
1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties.
2. The facts of the case would indicate that tender was floated for the supply of item namely “Set of Carline for Power Car 200 KMPH” in the year 2019, where the petitioner was one of the participants. On 14.08.2019, the work in question was awarded vide purchase order of supply of “Set of Carline for Power Car 200 KMPH”.
3. The petitioner claims to have acted upon the purchase order and has KUMAR KAURAV undertaken various steps. On account of issuance of certain modification advise/ cancellation advise of certain quantity of purchase order etc., the petitioner requested the respondent to cancel the purchase order without any financial repercussion.
4. According to the petitioner, on account of all those reasons, the petitioner has suffered certain losses and a legal notice was sent. The petitioner, therefore, claims an amount of Rs.12,64,083/- including interest @ 18% per annum from the cancellation of goods i.e. 29.09.2021 till the realization of the same with pendent elite future interest etc.
5. In purchase order, Indian Railways Standard Conditions of Contract are being stated to be the integral part of the contract. Clause 2900 of the said document reads as under:-
aside by the court for any reason, it shall be lawful for the authority appointing the arbitrator to appoint another arbitrator in place of the outgoing arbitrator in the manner aforesaid.
(c) It is further a term of this contract that no person other than the person appointed by the authority as aforesaid should act as arbitrator and that if for any reason that is not possible, the matter is not to be referred to 'arbitration at all.
(d) The arbitrator may from time-to-time with the consent of all the parties to the contract enlarge the time for making the award. (e} Upon every and any such reference, the assessment of the cost incidental to the reference and award respectively shall be in the discretion of the arbitrator. (f) Subject as aforesaid, the Arbitration Act, 1940 and the rules there under and any statutory modifications thereof for the time being in force shall be deemed to apply to the arbitration proceedings under this clause. (g) The venue of arbitration shall be the place from which the acceptance note is issued or such other place as the arbitrator at his discretion may determine. (h) In this clause the authority, to appoint the arbitrator includes, if there be no such authority, the officer who is for the time being discharging the functions of that authority, whether in addition to other functions or otherwise.”
6. On notice being issued, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent on instructions contends that subject to reserving all rights and contentions of the respondent, the Court may consider to appoint an Arbitrator.
7. It is evident that where there exists an arbitration clause and in the event any dispute arises between the parties, there should be no impediment in appointing an independent Sole Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes between the parties. In this regard, reference can be made to the decisions of the Supreme Court in Perkins Eastman Architects DPC v. HSCC (India) Ltd.,[1] TRF Limited v. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd.,[2] Bharat Broadband Network Limited v. United Telecoms Limited.,[3] and Interplay between Arbitration Agreements under the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 & the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, In re 4.
8. In view of aforesaid, the Court appoints Mr. Shivank Diddi, Advocate (Mob No.-+91 9958260000, Email-shivankdiddi.office@gmail.com) as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
9. The Sole Arbitrator may proceed with the arbitration proceedings, subject to furnishing to the parties, requisite disclosures as required under Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred as “A&C Act”).
10. The Sole Arbitrator shall be entitled to fee in accordance with the IVth Schedule of the A&C Act; or as may otherwise be agreed to between the parties and the learned Sole Arbitrator.
11. The parties shall share the arbitrator's fee and arbitral cost, equally.
12. All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the claims/counter claims are kept open, to be decided by the Sole Arbitrator on their merits, in accordance with law.
13. Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of opinion of this Court on the merits of the controversy between the parties. All rights and contentions of the parties in this regard are reserved.
14. Let the copy of the said order be sent to the newly appointed Arbitrator through the electronic mode as well.
15. Accordingly, the instant petition stands disposed of.