AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Vipin Sanghi, CJ
The applicants have preferred these Applications under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator.
In all these cases, the applicants have entered into separate identical Agreements with the respondent for the purpose of “laying of HDPE pipeline”. The Agreements contain the dispute resolution mechanism, which contemplates settlement of disputes between the parties through arbitration as a final resort - as contained in Clause 34 of the respective Agreements.
The applicants claim that the respondents delayed the payments under the contracts, and their claims are essentially for interest on such delayed payments.
The applicants invoked the Arbitration Agreements in each of these case on various dates. The notices for invocation of Arbitration in each of these cases have been placed on record. Despite invocation of Arbitration, the Arbitral Tribunals have not been constituted, and consequently, these Applications have been preferred.
In all these Applications, counter-affidavits have been filed by the respondents. The respondents do not dispute the fact that the parties had entered into the contracts on which these applications are premised, which contain the Arbitration Clause, as aforesaid. It is stated that under Clause 9 of the Agreements, no interest or damages are payable by the Government in respect of any money which may become due owing to any dispute, difference or misunderstanding between the Engineer-in-charge on the one hand, and the Contractor on the other hand or with respect to any delay on the part of the Engineer-in-making periodical or final payment or in any other respect whatsoever.
As to whether or not the applicants are entitled to the amounts claimed under the contracts is an issue, which squarely falls for consideration of the Arbitral Tribunal and is not for me, while dealing with these Applications, to interpret terms of the respective contracts.
Since there is no dispute regarding existence of the Agreements, and the Arbitration Clauses, as also the invocation of Arbitration by the applicants, I am inclined to allow these Applications.
The claims made by the applicants in each of these cases are of rather small amounts. Considering the same, learned counsels are agreeable for appointment of a practicing Advocate of this Court as a Sole Arbitrator.
Accordingly, I appoint Ms. Prabha Naithani, Advocate, as a sole Arbitrator in all these case.
All the Applications stand disposed of accordingly.