ARBP/36/2025 of M/S. F.R CONSTRUCTION,WEST BENGAL Vs MAHANADI COALFIELDS LIMITED, SAMBALPUR on 3 July 2026

ORDER

03.07.2026

03.

1. The instant application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short, ‘the Act’) for appointment of an Arbitrator was admitted on 9th May 2025, wherein a direction was passed upon the petitioner to effect the service upon the opposite parties.

2. Pursuant to the notice inviting tender dated 3rd May, 2021 for construction of Hingula College Building for shifting of the existing structure at Kalamcchuin village under BOCP of Hingula area, the petitioner was adjudged as the successful bidder and was awarded a contract on 31st August, 2021. Subsequently, an agreement was executed on 30th September, 2021. While executing the work in terms of the said agreement, the obstacles and/or hindrances, which were created in the site, were not removed by the authorities. The petitioner further intimated that he had deployed the machineries as well as adequate manpower to start the work, but there was interference from the local henchmen, who prevented the execution of the said work. Ultimately, the matter was considered at the higher level and assurance was given for removal of such obstacles and to extend the period of time for completion of the said work. The letter was issued on 25th August, 2022 intimating the petitioner that the time for completion of the work has been extended but subject to the right of the management to impose penalty during final time extension on the basis of the merit. Though the second extension was also granted but nothing substantial assistance was extended to the petitioner and ultimately, the authorities terminated the contract. The petitioner claimed the rights in terms of the arbitration clause, which provides the resolution of the dispute through an Arbitrator.

3. The opposite parties have denied the claims of the petitioner, which is vividly reflected in the counter affidavit filed in the instant application.

4. This Court does not find any plea of the invalidity of the agreement is taken nor there is any denial of the existence of the arbitration agreement. Since the dispute has arisen between the parties to the contract, where the parties have agreed for adjudication of the

dispute through an Arbitral Tribunal, this Court does not find any impediment in entertaining the prayer and/or reliefs claimed in the instant application. Furthermore, the notice invoking the arbitration clause was also received by the opposite parties, but they could not agree on a name of the Arbitrator. Since the dispute is amenable to be adjudicated by the Arbitral Tribunal, the instant application is thus allowed.

5. After considering the nature of the dispute and the claim so raised, Dr. Justice A. K. Rath, former Judge of this Court is appointed as the Arbitrator, who shall decide the dispute between the parties immediately upon communication of the instant order and determine the dispute raised by the parties. The arbitration shall take place under the aegis of the High Court of Orissa Arbitration Centre. Remuneration of the Arbitrator shall be equally paid by the parties as per the 4th Schedule appended to the said Act. The Arbitrator shall make efforts to adhere the time limit set forth in Section 29A of the said Act.

6. This arbitration application is thus disposed of.

(Harish Tandon)

Chief Justice

M. Panda Digitally Signed Signed by: MRUTYUNJAYA PANDA

Reason:

Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Date: 08-Jul-2026 14:41:04 Signature Not Verified