AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The Court : This is an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The case of the petitioner is that the contract in the particular case is the manufacture and sale of heavy vehicle being High Wall Miner, model HW 300. Several inspections have taken place in the past and photographs have also been annexed to the copy of the petition. The petitioner now submits that it appears that the machinery that has been manufactured by the respondent for the petitioner, has been sold to a third party or is being used by the respondent for fulfillment of another contract. The petitioner submits that the substantial amount of money has been taken under the contract (Rs.24 crores) and the contract is time bound. He further submits that the respondent is bound under Clause 7.4 of the contract to allow for inspection of the progress of the manufacture of the machinery.
Mr. Surajit Nath Mitra, learned senior advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that the petitioner is not the sole client of the respondent and therefore sale of machinery manufactured by the respondent to any third party is permissible.
In my view, the entire matter can be cleared by a special officer visiting the site of the respondent company to inventorise the parts of the machinery manufactured by the respondent as also understand the progress in the manufacture of the machinery being built by the respondent for the petitioner.
Mr. Debmalya Ghoshal, Advocate (Mob: 9830457792) of this High Court is appointed as Special Officer and is directed to carry out an inventory and file a report within one week after reopening of ensuing Puja vacation. He is also directed to carry out the inspection and inventory within one week from today. His initial remuneration shall be Rs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh).
The petitioner is directed to make arrangement for the conveyance and stay of the Special Officer, if required. The Special Officer shall be at liberty to take the assistance of the concerned police station, if required.
Liberty is granted to the petitioner to move this matter before the vacation bench if need so arises.
Let affidavit in opposition be filed within two days after re-opening of the High Court after Puja vacation; reply thereto, if any, be filed three days thereafter.
Liberty to mention.