AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Ritu Bahri, CJ
1) Counsel for the respondent is not disputing Annexure-2 at page 19 of the paper-book, which contains arbitration clause No. 19 stipulating that if at any time, any question, dispute or difference whatever shall arise between tenderer and the institute (purchaser) upon or in relation to or in connection with the contract, either of the parties may give to the other notice in writing of the existence of such a question, dispute or difference and the same shall be referred to arbitrator.
2) Both the parties are agreeing for arbitration. Since the amount involved is more than rupees seven crores, this Court is of the view that it will be better if an independent Arbitrator is appointed.
3) This Court proceeds to appoint Mr. Justice M.M. Ghildiyal, (Retd.) Judge, High Court of Uttarakhand, as an Arbitrator in this case to adjudicate the disputes which have arisen between the parties under the aforesaid contract agreement. The seat of arbitration will be at Dehradun.
4) The Arbitration Application is, accordingly, allowed. Consent may be sought from the Arbitrator under Section 11(8) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.