Himachal Pradesh High Court
ARB.C/116/2021 of M/S S.B. TRADING COMPANY Vs STATE OF HP AND ANOTHER on 31 December 2021
COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA ON THE 31st DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ, CHIEF JUSTICE ARBITRATION CASE No. 116 of 2021 Between: M/S S.B. TRADING COMPANY THROUGH PARTNER SH. RAJESH CHADHA, R/O COLLEGE ROAD, MANDI, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA ON THE 31[st] DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021
BEFORE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ, CHIEF JUSTICE
ARBITRATION CASE No. 116 of 2021
Between:M/S S.B. TRADING COMPANY THROUGH PARTNER SH. RAJESH CHADHA, R/O COLLEGE ROAD, MANDI, DISTRICT MANDI, H.P. …PETITIONER (BY SH. SUMEET RAJ SHARMA, ADVOCATE) AND 1. STATE OF H.P. THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY I&PH, HP SECRETARIAT, CHOTTA SHIMLA, SHIMLA-6. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, JALSHAKTI DIVISION NO. 2, KULLU AT BHUNTAR, DISTT. KULLU (HP). …RESPONDENTS (BY SH. VIKAS RATHORE, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERAL)
_____________________________________________________
This case coming on for orders this day, the Court delivered the following:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
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.
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner is before this Court in this petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (for short ‘the Act’), seeking for appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute that has arisen between the parties. 2. It is the case of the petitioner-company that there was an agreement vide (Annexure P-2), between the petitioner and the respondents and accordingly a contract was entered into between the parties in respect of work “providing LWSS to PC Hub Chanoun, Tehsil Banjar, Distt. Kullu, HP (SH: providing and erection of pumping machinery)”. Certain disputes have arisen thereon. Clause 25 of the agreement provides for appointment of an Arbitrator.
3. Under Section 11(6) of the Act, the High Court, while considering any application under Section 11(6) thereof, must confine its examination only to the existence of an Arbitration agreement. Since the existence of an arbitration agreement has not been disputed by the respondent, this application deserves to be allowed and the dispute referred to arbitration. 4. Having considered the contentions of both sides, Shri M.D. Sharma, District & Sessions Judge (Retd.), R/o Gulab Kunj, Lower Kaithu (Annadel), Shimla-171 003, is appointed as an Arbitrator, after his disclosure in writing is obtained in terms of Section 11(8) of the Act and only after receipt thereof, shall his appointment, as an Arbitrator, come into force. 5. On his giving consent to arbitrate the dispute between the parties, as an Arbitrator, Shri M.D. Sharma, District & Sessions Judge (Retd.), shall enter into reference, and shall pass an award in accordance with law. Copy of this order be forwarded to the learned counsel for the parties, as also to the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator so appointed shall be entitled to fee as per 4th Schedule appended to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
6. The arbitration case is disposed of accordingly, so also pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.
December 31, 2021 (hemlata)
( Mohammad Rafiq ) Chief Justice