Gujarat Construction Company v. Union of India

Bombay HC25 Feb 2025ARP/90/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction; Arbitration Petition No. 90 of 2024; Gujarat Construction Co. v. Union of India; Section 11 Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996; appointment of Sole Arbitrator Arvind Kumar Arora (Retd. D.G. (Pers.), M.E.S.); consent reference by both parties; Agreement dated August 24, 2017; disclosure under Sections 11(8)/12(1); costs shared equally; decided February 25, 2025 by Somasekhar Sundaresan J.; merits expressly left open.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Mr. Arvind Kumar Arora as Sole Arbitrator for all disputes under the Agreement dated August 24, 2017; arbitrator to forward statutory disclosure under Sections 11(8) and 12(1) within two weeks; arbitral costs and fees to be borne equally in the first instance. ¶¶18

Gujarat Construction Company vs Union of India — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether an arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for disputes and differences said to have arisen between the parties under an Agreement dated August 24, 2017.

¶¶12

Court's answer

Mr. Arvind Kumar Arora, D.G. (Pers.) Retired M.E.S., an Advocate of the Court, is appointed as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of and in connection with the Agreement dated August 24, 2017.

¶¶19

Key takeaways

Nothing in the order is an expression of opinion on the merits or the relative strength of the parties; all issues on merits are expressly kept open to be agitated before the arbitral tribunal.obiter¶¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Arbitration Petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by Gujarat Construction Co. against Union of India seeking appointment of an arbitrator for disputes under an Agreement dated August 24, 2017. On the joint submission of counsel for both parties that they were agreeable to reference of all disputes to an arbitral tribunal, Somasekhar Sundaresan J. finally disposed of the Petition, appointing Mr. Arvind Kumar Arora, D.G. (Pers.) Retired M.E.S., an Advocate of the Court, as Sole Arbitrator. The arbitrator was directed to forward the statutory Statement of Disclosure under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) within two weeks; parties to appear before him for conduct directions; arbitral costs and fees to be borne equally in the first instance subject to the final Award on costs. The Court expressly recorded that nothing in the order expressed any opinion on the merits or the relative strength of the parties, and all issues on merits were kept open.

¶1

82-ARP-90-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 90 OF 2024

¶4

Gujarat Construction Co. …Petitioner

Versus

Union of India

…Respondent

Mr. Mihir S. Raje, for the Petitioner.

¶9

Mr. J.S. Saluja, for Respondent.

¶10

CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. DATE : FEBRUARY 25, 2025

¶11

PC :

¶12

This Petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ( “the Act” ), seeking appointment of an arbitrator in connection with disputes and differences that are said to have arisen between the parties under an Agreement dated August 24, 2017.

¶13

Today, when the matter is called out, Learned Counsel for the parties jointly submit that they would be agreeable to have all the disputes and differences between them in connection with the aforesaid agreement referred to resolution by an arbitral tribunal, leaving it open to the parties to seek such interlocutory relief as they may desire from the arbitral tribunal.

¶14

Digitally signed by ASHWINI ASHWINI JANARDAN JANARDAN VALLAKATI VALLAKATI Date: 2025.03.01 16:05:11 +0530

¶15

Page 1 of 3 February 25, 2025

¶16

Ashwini Vallakati

¶17

82-ARP-90-2024.doc

¶18

In these circumstances, the Petition is hereby finally disposed of , in terms of the following order:

¶19

A] Mr. Arvind Kumar Arora, D.G. (Pers.) Retired M.E.S., an Advocate of this Court, is hereby appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of and in connection with the Agreement referred to above;

¶20

Office Address:-

¶21

B-333, C.R. Park, New Delhi-19. Email ID: [email protected]

¶22

B] A copy of this Order will be communicated to the Learned Sole Arbitrator by the Advocates for the Petitioner within one week from the date on which this order is uploaded on the website of this Court. The Petitioner shall provide the contact and communication particulars of the parties to the Arbitral Tribunal along with a copy of this Order;

¶23

C] The Learned Sole Arbitrator is requested to forward the statutory Statement of Disclosure under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Act to the parties within a period of two weeks from receipt of a copy of this Order;

¶24

D] The parties shall appear before the Learned Sole

Page 2 of 3

February 25, 2025

Ashwini Vallakati

82-ARP-90-2024.doc

Arbitrator on such date and at such place as indicated, to obtain appropriate directions with regard to conduct of the arbitration including fixing a schedule for pleadings, examination of witnesses, if any, schedule of hearings etc. At such meeting, the parties shall provide a valid and functional email address along with mobile and landline numbers of the respective Advocates of the parties to the Arbitral Tribunal. Communications to such email addresses shall constitute valid service of correspondence in connection with the arbitration;

¶30

E] All arbitral costs and fees of the Arbitral Tribunal shall be borne by the parties equally in the first instance, and shall be subject to any final Award that may be passed by the Tribunal in relation to costs.

¶31

Needless to say, nothing contained in this order is an expression of an opinion on merits of the matter or the relative strength of the parties. All issues on merits are expressly kept open to be agitated before the arbitral tribunal appointed hereby.

¶32

All actions required to be taken pursuant to this order shall be taken upon receipt of a downloaded copy as available on this Court’s website.

¶33

[ SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J.]

¶34

Page 3 of 3

¶35

February 25, 2025

¶36

Ashwini Vallakati

Gujarat Construction Company v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gujarat Construction Company v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Saurashtra Chs Ltd. vs Sayla Realtors

Aditya Birla Finance Limited vs Navneet Gupta

Alpine Housing Development Corporation Ltd. vs Central Railway

sunita badrilal sharma vs venkatesh shetty

State Bank of India vs Hcl Technologies Ltd.

Fresenius Kabi India Private Limited vs Lotus Medicare Services Pvt. Ltd.