Prem Shanker Asopa, J. - (1.) HEARD counsel for the parties. This arbitration application under Sec. 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been arising out of the agreement dated 17th May, 2008 (Annexure -1) which contains clauses 1. Amicable Settlement and 1.1 Dispute Settlement in Annexure -C annexed to the agreement for resolving the disputes.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that the applicant Samajik Arthik Vikas Samiti, Village New Ralawata is an NGO which has undertaken the activities in pursuance of the project of Public Health & Engineering Department, Government of Rajasthan. A project coordination agreement of RIFMP -II dated 17.5.2008 to supply and install domestic Defluoridation Unit in the identified villages was executed between the Additional Chief Engineer, Public Health & engineering Department Region Bharatpur and the Secretary of the applicant. As per the case of the applicant all the works assigned in connection with the said agreement was executed by the applicant and consequently final bill of Rs. 12,03,118/ - dated 29.9.2010 was raised by the applicant in accordance with the provisions of the agreement and against the said final bill only Rs. 4,00,557/ - was released vide demand draft dated 31.3.2011 and no reason whatsoever has been assigned for such deduction. In the agreement Annexure -1, clause 29, provision with regard to Resolution of Disputes has been provided which stipulates that the dispute shall be resolved as per the provisions given in Annexure -C and further Annexure -C contains provisions with regard to "Settlement of Disputes". To resolve the dispute by amicable settlement, the applicant sent the letter to the respondents on 4.4.2011 through registered post and when no action was taken then again letter dated 14.5.2011 was sent to the respondents but they have failed to redress the genuine grievance of the applicant. When the non -applicants did not pay any heed to resolve the dispute by amicable settlement as provided under the agreement, the counsel for the applicant sent notice dated 12.12.2011 through registered post asking them to resolve the dispute by amicable settlement proposing the name of Shri Braj Mohan Gupta, (Retd. RHJS) as sole arbitrator and despite receiving the notice, the non -applicants did not pay any heed. The case of the applicant is further to this effect that despite performing its obligation under the agreement in a satisfactory manner, the non -applicants have failed to perform their obligation and have also failed to refer the matter to the arbitrator even after expiry of prescribed period of 30 days.
(3.) NON -applicants have filed reply and in their reply the non -applicants have not disputed execution of the agreement containing arbitration clause 29 for resolution of differences which has been mentioned in Annexure -C annexed to the agreement as sub -clauses 1 and 1.1. However, on merits they have submitted that the bill has been paid as per the work done by the application and nothing remains to be paid.;