ASHOK KUMAR MANDHYANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND 5 ORS
HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
Ashok Kumar Mandhyani
Union Of India And 5 Ors
Click here to view full judgement.
Ujjal Bhuyan, J. -
(1.) Though this petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of Arbitrator under Sub-Section-(6) thereof, the question which has ultimately arisen for consideration is whether in a proceeding under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (1996 Act), award passed by the Arbitral Tribunal in violation of the law can be declared as nonest whereafter fresh Arbitrator can be appointed ?
(2.) Heard Mr. R Hussain, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. B Sharma, learned counsel for the Railways.
(3.) Following a tender process pursuant to NIT dated 28.02.2012, petitioner was offered the contract of clearing the water way of bridge including dismantling of old sub-structure, making proper protection work and other ancillary work in between station TKG-AUB in connection with gauge conversion of AUB-SGUJ Section of N.F.Railway. Petitioner accepted the same vide acceptance letter dated 27.06.2012. As was the normal practice, petitioner commenced the work thereafter by setting up camp and mobilising men and material in view of the short duration of the contract. Belatedly, contract agreement was entered into between the parties on 15.11.2012. As per the agreement, the total value of the work was Rs.1,36,53,793.00 and the date of completion of the work was 26.11.2012. The agreement provided for an arbitration clause.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.