CourtKutchehry.com
High CourtsSingle Bench(2010) 12 SHI CK 0319

Kapil Bansal vs State of H.P

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 2 December 2010

HON’BLE JUDGES
Surjit Singh, J
CASE NUMBER
Arbitration C. No. 50 of 2010

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 342 words

Surjit Singh, J.—Heard and gone through the record.

2.

Some work was awarded to the petitioner, by the respondents, vide agreement No. 153 of 1997/1998. Work was completed/partially completed in the year 2003. In the meanwhile, respondents passed an order, holding that petitioner was liable to pay a sum of Rs. 43 lacs, by way of compensation. That order was challenged by filing a suit in this Court in the year 2002. That suit was registered as Civil Suit No. 38 of 2002 in the relevant register. Suit was decreed in favour of the petitioner on 31st July, 2009. Petitioner had certain claims against the respondents arising out of agreement which the respondents did not pay, on account of passing of the aforesaid order of payment of compensation. After this Court passed decree dated 31st July, 2009, petitioner approached the respondents to appoint an arbitrator for settlement of his claims in terms of arbitration clause in the aforesaid agreement. When no arbitrator was appointed, petitioner filed the present petition, u/s 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

3.

Reply has been filed by the respondents, in which it is stated that the respondents intend to file an appeal against decree of this Court in the Hon�ble Supreme Court. Respondents have not filed any appeal though a period of more than 16 months has elapsed since the passing of the decree. Moreover, decree was passed in July, 2009 by a Single Judge of this Court and the appeal should lie to this Court as Original Side Appeal. In any case, if the respondents intend to file appeal against the decree of this Court that cannot be a ground for not appointing an arbitrator for adjudicating the disputed claims of the petitioner.

4.

For the foregoing reasons, the present petition is allowed and Shri S.K. Sharda, retired Chief Engineer, who is presently stationed at Shimla, is appointed as arbitrator in the case. He shall be paid a sum of Rs.1.5 lacs, inclusive of all expenses, like stationery, clerical job etc.

Petition stands disposed of.