AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Prem Shanker Asopa, J.—This arbitration application under Sec. 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by the Applicant for referring the matter to the Chairman-cum-Managing Director, under Clause 17 of the Agreement dated 24.7.2012, for settlement of the dispute. Briefly stated, the facts of the case, are that an agreement dated 24.7.2012 (Anx.1) was executed between the Executive Engineer (O&M), AVVNL, Neem Ka Thana, Distt. Sikar and the Secretary, Shekhawati Ex-servicemen Welfare Cooperative Society Ltd. Sikar for security services and the Applicant selected and appointed seven security guards for providing the security services to the Non-applicant AVVNL. Vide order dated 30.7.2012 (Anx.9), the aforesaid Agreement dated 24.7.2012 was cancelled by the Non-applicants without assigning any reason, therefore, dispute and differences have arisen on account of the cancellation of the aforesaid agreement for supply of the ex-servicemen for security services.
The Non-applicants have filed reply to the arbitration application wherein it has been stated that the Superintending Engineer, AVVNL, Sikar issued amendment to their original letter of sanction and directed to engage service of ex-servicemen through the Sikar Ex-servicemen Welfare Cooperative Society, Sikar only, hence, the contract signed with the Applicant had to be cancelled by letter dated 30.7.2012. It has further been stated that no loss has been caused to the Applicant.
Submission of the counsel for the Applicant is that the Non-applicants have acted arbitrarily and the loss has been caused to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/-. The Non-applicants may act further arbitrarily, therefore, the matter may be referred to the Arbitrator.
No one is present for the Non-applicants. However, I have perused the reply filed by the Non-applicants wherein it has been stated that the contract, which has remained in force for six days, has not been acted upon and no loss has been caused to the Applicant, therefore, the matter is not fit to be referred to the Arbitrator.
I have gone through record of the arbitration application and further considered the aforesaid submission of the counsel for the Applicant as also the submissions made by the Non-applicants in the reply to the arbitration-application.
In my view, since the contract, which has remained in force for six days, has not been acted upon, no arbitral dispute of substantial nature has arisen which requires adjudication by the Arbitrator. However, in an appropriate case, the issue of arbitrariness of the Non-applicants and further loss will be decided and the same is kept open. The arbitration application is disposed of, as indicated above.