Rajasthan High Court
ARBAP/11/2025 of M/S GANGADHAR AGARWAL, Vs UNION OF INDIA, on 14 August 2026
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Arbitration Application No. 11/2025 CNR: RJHC020075942025 | URN: ARBAP / 12U / 2025 M/s Gangadhar Agarwal, A Partnership Firm (Earstwhile Proprietor Firm) Having Its Office At Near Agresen Colony, Behind New Sabji Mandi, Bayana, Dist. Bharatpur
[2026:RJ-JP:32321]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Arbitration Application No. 11/2025
CNR: RJHC020075942025 | URN: ARBAP / 12U / 2025
M/s Gangadhar Agarwal, A Partnership Firm (Earstwhile Proprietor Firm) Having Its Office At Near Agresen Colony, Behind New Sabji Mandi, Bayana, Dist. Bharatpur Through Its Partner Gangadhar Agarwal.
----Applicant
Versus
1.
Union of India, Through General Manager, North Central Railways, Subedar Ganj Road, Subedarganj Prayagraj (UP)-211015.
2.
Sr. Divisional Engineer-II, North Central Railway, Agra.
----Non-Applicants
For Petitioner(s)
:
Ms. Anita Goyal with
Mr. Naman Jain,
Mr. Devraj Suman on behalf of
Mr. Jatin Agarwal
For Non-Applicant(s)
:
Mr. Ashish Kumar
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
1
Decisions referred to
In this index
1
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
Order
14/08/2026
1. A dispute has arisen between the parties with respect to the agreement entered into amongst them, which reflects that both the parties had agreed to get their dispute resolved through an Arbitrator, who is to be appointed under the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act of 1996’). For appointment of Arbitrator, the present application has come before this Court.
2. In the case of M/s Devender Singh Contractor Vs. Union of India: (D.B. Civil Reference No.1/2024), this Court held as under:
[2026:RJ-JP:32321] (2 of 2) [ARBAP-11/2025] "It is not in dispute between the parties that there exist an arbitration clause. The arbitration clause is an independent clause which has to be read independently of the other clauses of the Arbitrator and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') and unless there is an embargo in the said arbitration clause merely because in some other clauses of the agreement, certain parts are excluded would not create embargo for appointment of arbitrator. In, Interplay between Arbitration Agreements (2024) 6 SCC 1, the Supreme Court held that if the arbitration clause exist then the question of arbitrability of non-arbitrability will have to be examined by the concerned arbitrator who is to be appointed by the Court in terms of Section 11(6) of the Act. Leaving it open to the concerned arbitrator to exercise his powers in terms of Section 16 of the Act."
3. This Court has also decided the distinction of disputes at the level of agreement would not be valid condition, as once there is an arbitration clause, the kinds of disputes which may arise will have to be decided by the arbitrator alone. This Court deems it appropriate to appoint Hon'ble Mr. Justice Banwari Lal Sharma, (Former Judge Rajasthan High Court), R/o 49-50, 4D, Campus, Theme Colony, Near Murlipura Police Station, Jaipur, to act as the Sole Arbitrator and to decide all issues without prejudice to the rights and contentions raised in the present application.
4. The arbitration fees shall be determined in accordance with the Fourth Schedule of the Act of 1996, as amended. The fee of the Arbitrator will be equally borne by both the parties.
5. The arbitration application is allowed accordingly.
6. Copy of this order be sent to the appointed Sole Arbitrator. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),ACTING CJ Amit/26