M.Y. Eqbal, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) IN the instant request petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Petitioner has prayed for appointment of an independent person as an Arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes arose out of a contract. Petitioner M/s Goyel Brothers is a firm carrying on business of civil and transport contracts who pursuant to advertisement issued by the Irrigation Department Subernrekha Multipurpose Project submitted tender for the work of excavation and bed lining of Galudih Right Bank Main Canal. Petitioner submitted tender which was accepted and work order was issued in 1984 and the work was to be completed by 9th October, 1986. Petitioner's case is that the work could not be completed because of non -fulfillment of contractual obligations by the respondents. Petitioner alleged to have made series of correspondence with the respondents but even the bills for the work done was not cleared because of paucity of fund. The contract was ultimately closed in 1992. It is contended that final bill was prepared by the respondents in 1995 but all sum payable to the petitioner was not included. Petitioner lodged his protest vide letter dated 3.11.1995. Petitioner, thereafter, vide letter dated 5.12.1995 addressed to the Superintending Engineer, Galudih Barrage Circle, Mahulla sought decision within 60 days in terms of Clause 51 of the contract. The Superintending Engineer in response to his letter denied and disputed the claim of the petitioner which was communicated vide letter dated 24.2.1996.
(3.) PETITIONER 's further case is that being dissatisfied with the decision of Superintending Engineer, petitioner vide letter dated 29.2.1996 and 23.3.1996 made reference to the concerned Chief Engineer of the respondents for arbitration in terms of Clause 52 of the Contract. However, the Chief Engineer vide letter dated 2.4.1996 furnished a panel of 3 (three) persons for selection of an Arbitrator for deciding only some of the disputes and also counter claim of the respondents. One Mr. Gagan, Director, Hydrology Water resources Department was appointed Arbitrator but he by letter dated 16.4.1996 expressed his inability to accept the appointment as sole arbitrator. Petitioner, thereafter, vide letter dated 28.4.1996 requested the Chief Engineer to furnish a fresh panel for appointment of Arbitrator but latter did not agree to the same.;