Sh. Siddhant Shangle v. Govt of NCT of Delhi

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of Sole Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes arising between the parties qua the Contract executed in September, 2013 and the General Conditions of Contract (GCC).

2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the respondent vide agreement bearing no. 62/EE/PWD/CRMD M- 313/2013-14 awarded the work of “Improvement of drainage system Polo Road, Kalyan Vihar Road, and Vijay Nagar Road upto Najafgarh Drain” to the late father of the petitioner.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the stipulated date of initiation and completion of the said work was 13th October, 2013 and 10th April, 2014 respectively. It is further submitted that the late father of the petitioner completed the above-mentioned work on 6th April, 2015 and the final bill was paid by the respondent to the late father of the petitioner on 31st March, 2016.

4. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the respondent department withheld an amount of Rs. 25,00,000/- vide CMB no. 868 on account of approval of some executed items of work by the higher authorities in the final bill.

5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that despite numerous request made by the late father of the petitioner, the respondent failed to release the abovementioned amount in favour of the late father of the petitioner.

6. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the efforts to resolve the dispute amicably between the parties have failed. Being aggrieved thereof, the late father of the petitioner was constrained to invoke the arbitration clause as contained in the GCC, Clause 25 vide legal notice dated 11th December, 2019.

7. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that in response to the said notice dated 11th December, 2019, the respondent admitted to the claim amount raised by the late father of the petitioner and stated that the same shall be released subsequent to the sanction of competent authority.

8. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the late father of the petitioner expired on 3rd March, 2020. It is further submitted that on account of COVID-19 lockdown, the matter could not be followed by the petitioner.

9. It is further submitted that on failure on part of the respondent department to take any action on the various requests raised by the petitioner, constrained the petitioner to invoke the arbitration clause again in accordance with Clause 25 of the GCC vide notice legal notice dated 13th September, 2022.

10. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent vehemently opposed the averments made in the present petition, however, fairly conceded to the arbitral nature of disputes arising between the parties and has no objection if an independent Sole Arbitrator is appointed to adjudicate the disputes arising between the parties.

11. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

12. As agreed on behalf of the parties, this Court finds it appropriate to refer all the disputes and disagreements between the parties to an independent Sole Arbitrator for their adjudication. Hence, the following order: ORDER

(i) Justice R.S. Chauhan, Former Chief Justice,

Uttarakhand High Court is appointed as a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties which have arisen under the Agreement executed in September, 2013 and the GCC;

(ii) The learned sole arbitrator, before entering the arbitration reference, shall ensure the compliance of Section 12(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996;