JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) By this application filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, 'the new Act'), the petitioner/firm seeks
appointment of an independent arbitrator for adjudicating the dispute that
has arisen between it and the respondent/company.
(2.) By an agreement dated 16-2-1995 concluded between the petitioner / firm
and the respondent/company, construction of factory building, formation of
roads and other civil engineering works of the respondent/company was
entrusted to the petitioner/firm. The estimated value of the contract was
approximately Rs. 48 lakhs. The work has not been completed within the
stipulated period. Clause 56 of the agreement provides for adjudication of
the disputes through arbitration.
(3.) The case of the petitioner/firm, in brief, is that it was submitting running
bills to the respondent/company and it was paid amounts in instalments. On
23-1-1996, the petitioner/firm has submitted the final bill amounting to Rs.
63,14,070/-. The respondent/company kept the matter pending for weeks and
after repeated demands, they had a negotiation but it failed and thereafter
the matter was referred to G. Satya Rao, Architect, by the respondent/company
for arbitration. A tripartite meeting was conducted on 24-2-1996 which was
attended by the representative of the petitioner/firm, respondent/company
and G. Satya Rao, the Architect. The Architect has taken sides with the
respondent/company and he was won over by it. The final payment was
deliberately delayed to pressurise the petitioner/firm. On 13-3-1996, the
representative of the petitioner/firm was offered Rs. 1 lakh as the final
payment though a sum of Rs. 10,71,586/- was due to it. The petitioner/firm
was in deep financial crisis as it had to clear the dues of other suppliers. The
attitude of the Chirman/Managing Director of the respondent/company was
unreasonable and harsh and, therefore, the partner of the petitioner / firm, Biju
Kolleri, had no other alternative but to accept the payment of Rs. 1 lakh. He
was forced to sign on the receipt of the final payment. On 4-4-1996, the
petitioner/firm, after making calculations, brought to the notice of the
respondent/company that the last bill was paid after drastically cutting the
rates and as such the petitioner /firm was again approaching it with full details.
On 8-4-1996, the petitioner/firm wrote to the respondent/company giving
details of the due and claimed Rs. 5,83,000/- on account of the work already
done and Rs. 2,88,240/- against other items, viz. escalation, cost of labour etc.,
total Rs. 8,71,240/- plus interest at the rate of 24 per cent per annum besides
Rs. 75,000/- towards the cost of arbitration. Inspite of exchange of letters, the
respondent/company did not appoint an arbitrator for resolving the dispute;
therefore, on 2-10-1996, the petitioner/firm nominated Shri A. Somaath as
the arbitrator from its side and called upon the respondent/company to
nominate an arbitrator from its side as per Clause 56 of the agreement, but
the respondent/company had refused to do so and, therefore, an independent
arbitrator should be appointed to adjudicate the dispute.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.