M/S SANMATI GEO TEXTILES vs M/S LINKCON AND DIGNITY INFRA PROJECTS JV

$~5

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of decision: 13th May, 2024

+ ARB.P. 398/2024
M/S SANMATI GEO TEXTILES ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sahil Garg & Mr. Abhinav Jain, Advocates.

versus

M/S LINKCON AND DIGNITY INFRA PROJECTS JV
….. Respondent
Through: None.

CORAM:
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. The present Petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act, 1996”) has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking appointment of a sole Arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes having arisen between the parties.
2. It is submitted in the petition that the petitioner is a Proprietorship concern acting through its sole Proprietor, Mr. Archit Jain and is rendering services in a wide range of construction/geosynthetic solutions, designing and construction of balanced and durable foundation and structures.
3. The respondent is a Joint Venture and is engaged in business of providing construction service, railway bridge construction service, road construction, heavy structural erection service and structural steel erection services along with allied services.
4. It is submitted that the respondent approached the petitioner to engage its services for its Site and Project, Jorhat to Jhanjhi Section of NH-37 from Kms. 453.000 to Kms. 490.800 in the State of Assam.
5. Upon acceptance of the said Project by the petitioner, the respondent issued the Work Order No. LD JV/NHIDCL/J-J/2020/141 dated 03.10.2020 for Design, Drawing and Supply of Moulds (returnable basis) Supply of Polyester Geo-strap, Labour for Casting and Erection of RE Wall Panels, Connectors, EPDM Pads, NWG, Supervision during casting and erection for Jorhat to Jhanjhi Section of NH-37 from Kms. 453.000 to Kms. 490.800 in the State of Assam at LD JV to the petitioner.
6. After issuance of the Work Order dated 03.10.2020, the petitioner started performing its part of the reciprocal obligations under the said Work Order and raised RA Bills from time to time.
7. It is submitted that despite raising the RA Bills and the same had been duly received, acknowledged and accepted by the respondent, the respondent had refrained from clearing the said RA Bills on completely erroneous considerations.
8. The petitioner, after running from pillar to post for the remittance of RA Bills, left with no option issued the Legal Notice dated 20.10.2021 invoking the Arbitration Clause 11 of the Special Conditions of Contract. But the respondent had failed to reply to the said Notice of Invocation.
9. The respondent has been served through e-mail but none has appeared on behalf of the respondent.
10. Submissions heard.
11. In view of the submissions made as well as Clause 11 of the Special Conditions of Contract which provides for arbitration and the petitioner has raised the arbitrable disputes and without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, the present petition is allowed. Mr. Amit Kapur, Advocate, Mobile No. 9899381000, is hereby appointed as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.
12. The parties are at liberty to raise their respective objections before the Arbitrator.
13. The fees of the learned Arbitrator would be fixed in accordance with the Fourth Schedule of the Act, 1996 or as consented by the parties.
14. This is subject to the Arbitrator making necessary disclosure as under Section 12(1) of the Act, 1996 and not being ineligible under Section 12(5) of the Act, 1996.
15. The arbitration shall be conducted under the aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre, Delhi High Court.
16. The parties are directed to contact the Arbitrator within one week of being communicated a copy of this Order to them by the Registry of this Court.
17. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of in the above terms.

(NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA)
JUDGE
MAY 13, 2024
S.Sharma

ARB.P. 398/2024 Page 1 of 3