Parnika Commercial & Estate (P) Ltd v. Govt of NCT

(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appoinUnent of an arbifator. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is a building contractor: The respondent invited the tender for the work of the developrnent of 'Consfiuction of General Pool Office Building, Bela Road, Near Ivletcafe House Delhi' and the work was awarded to the petitioner by letter dated 28ft August, 2006 for which an agreement No.47IEE/PWD-IIV2006-2007 was executed. It is stated in the petition that certain disputes arose between the parties and the respondent appointed the arbitator. The petitioner raised total 18 claims. However, the respondent referred 16 claims out of 18 claims to the arbitator for adjudication. The balance two claims i.e. 16 and 18 related to amount payable to electrical confiactor and cost of arbitation I 2013:DHC:8059 ( $.-. t) ( I I proceedings. The petitioner subrnitted the statement of facts raising total 18 claims as originally raised by it and clarified that he has enhanced the amount of three claims mentioning the reasons thereof. The learned Arbinator informed the petitioner in proceeding dated 30tl' January, 2012 that he will not consider any additional claims or enhanced amount of the clairn. The petitioner requested the respondent to refer the additional revised claims to the learned arbitator. The respondent issued letter dated 5il' Septemb er, 20!2 to show cause as to why the modified clairns may not be rejected which was duly replied by the petitioner, but the respondent has not referred the balance claims/amendments to the learned Arbitator. Even the learned Arbination is not inclined to consider the claims raised/modified by the petitioner at the time of filing of the statement of facts. Therefore, the present petition has been filed by the petitioner. I have heard the submissions of both the learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents. Liberly is granted to the petitioner to raise the additional claims as mentioned in para 7(xv) of the petition arising out of agreement No.4T/EE/PWD-III/2006-2007 before the learned Arbinator Sh.O.P.Bhatia, as appointbd by the responden! who will consider ths same and decide in accordance with law. The petition is accordingly disposed of. A copy of the order be communicated to the sole Arbitator for information and be also given dasti to both the parties. mffiftsK.D'. FEBRUARY 21,2013|iwka { \