AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
7 paragraphs · 268 wordsS.K. Mishra, J
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
In this petition, filed under Sub-section (6) of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for brevity ‘the Act’), the petitioner has prayed for appointment of an impartial person as Arbitrator, who is not a present or ex-employee of Public Works Department to arbitrate the dispute arising out of agreement No. 2584/62M-03/2016 dated 20.07.2016, between the parties.
Clause 24.4 of General Conditions of the Contract is the arbitration clause for resolving the dispute between the parties, which is not disputed by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State.
Both the learned counsel submit that the sole Arbitrator may be appointed. Both the learned counsel has made a suggestion before this Court that a former District Judge be appointed as the sole Arbitrator in the matter.
Hence, this petition is disposed of by appointing Ms. Indira Ashish, District Judge (Retd.), R/o 34-D, Race Course, Opposite Police Line Gate No. 1, Dehradun, as the sole Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties.
Let the Arbitrator be intimated accordingly. The learned Arbitrator shall, in terms of Section 11(8) of the Act, furnish her disclosure in writing to this Court within 15 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this Court. She shall, thereafter, fix her remuneration, and charges towards other expenses, in consultation with the parties to the dispute. She shall endeavour to complete the arbitral proceedings, and to pass an Award with utmost expedition, preferably within six months from the date on which she enters upon a Reference.
