SUDHIR NARAIN - (1.) This is an appeal against the order of the Court below dated 18-9-1996 appointing Arbitrator under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940.
(2.) The respondent, M/s. M.K. Traders, filed application under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act for appointment of an Arbitrator with the allegations that it entered into contract with the defendant-appellant on 5-1-1993 "to construct R.C.C. retaining wall". It started construction work after the execution of the contract which was to be completed by 4-7-1993. The construction work continued for about four months but according to him due to wrong designing of Piles and departmental carelessness, the construction work could not be completed. The Manager of the appellant wrote a letter dated 21-5-1993 to the plaintiff directing him to stop further construction. After six months, it received letter dated 5-10-1993 from the Project Manager, asking the plaintiff to start construction again. The plaintiff-respondent asked the appellant to enhance the rate due to increase in market rate of materials. The appellant determined the contract by letter dated 22-2-1994. The plaintiff requested to appoint an Arbitrator. The appellant did not appoint any Arbitrator as suggested by the respondent.
(3.) The appellant contested the claim of the respondent and denied that there was any cause of action for referring the matter to the Arbitrator. The plaintiff did not itself comply with the terms of the agreement and failed to raise construction within time. The Court below after considering the contention raised by the parties held that in accordance with clause 24 of the agreement, the Arbitrator was to be appointed as the difference and dispute had arisen between the parties. The Court appointed Lalta Singh (retired Chief Engineer, U.P. Jal Nigam. Allahabad) as an Arbitrator and the dispute as detailed in Schedule A of the plaint has been referred to him.;