Prakash Tatia, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. In this case, there is no dispuie with respect to the relevant facts. The contract is dated 28th August, 1993 between the applicant-respondent and non-applicant- appellant. As per the copy of the final bill the work commenced on 21st Sept., 1993 and completed on 30th August, 1993. It is a case of the respondent-applicant that the respondent-claimant is entitled for seeking a direction from the court for appointment of the arbitrator because there arises a dispute between the parties because the appellant-non-applicant failed to make the payment as claimed by the applicant-respondent.
(2.) The applicant-respondent submitted an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on the ground mentioned above. The appellant-non-applicant submitted a reply to the claim raised by the respondent-claimant by saying that since the applicant has accepted the payment of the final bill with clear receipt of full and final satisfaction of the claim, therefore, there is no dispute between the parties and no arbitrator can be appointed as the contract has come to an end. It is also submitted that the applicant has withdrawn the amount from the non-applicant- appellant without there being any protest.
(3.) The learned trial court, after going through the submissions and the perusal of the relevant provision of law and the situation, held that the claimant before withdrawing the amount and before signing the full and final satisfaction receipt, the claimant raised his protest by letter dated 27th Feb., 1995, which document is also not disputed by the appellant-non-applicant. The claimant also gave a notice dated 7th August, 1995 to the non- applicant-respondent. Therefore, the court below held that the claimant has not waived his right for the claim and, therefore, dispute survives and is referable to the arbitrator. Therefore, directed Chief Engineer to appoint the arbitrator by order of dated 6th July, 1999.;