Allowed

Rk Jain and Sons Hospitality Services (P) Ltd. v. Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.

Delhi HC14 Feb 2024ARB.P./73/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court appointed Mr. Bishwajit Dubey as arbitrator for disputes between RK Jain and Sons Hospitality Services and DSIIIDC following the exhaustion of contractual dispute redressal procedures.

What did the court decide?

Mr. Bishwajit Dubey appointed as arbitrator; fee governed by Fourth Schedule of Arbitration Act.

Rk Jain and Sons Hospitality Services (P) Ltd. Vs Delhi State… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~7

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 73/2024 and I.A. 1365/2024

¶4

RK JAIN AND SONS HOSPITALITY SERVICES (P) LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Abhinav Sharma, Mr. Ravi Singh Chhikara and Mr. Shreesh Pathak, Advs. (M: 9953264242).

¶5

versus

¶6

DELHI STATE INDUSTRIAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. R. K. Dhawan, Standing Counsel with Mr. V. K. Teng, Mrs. Nisha Dhawan, Ms. Shivani Taneja, and Ms. Anwesha Singh, Advocates (M: 9899775330).

¶7

CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH O R D E R

¶8

% 14.02.2024

¶9

This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

¶10

This is a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by the Petitioner-RK Jain and Sons Hospitality Services (P) Ltd. seeking appointment of an arbitrator in regard to disputes between the parties pursuant to agreement dated 27th July, 2016. The said contract is in respect of maintenance of Delhi State Industrial & Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter, 'DSIIDC') offices at Patparganj, Delhi.

¶11

Ld. Counsel for the Respondent Mr. Dhawan has appeared and submits that an Arbitrator may be appointed in the matter.

¶12

Page 1 of 5

¶13

ARB.P. 73/2024

¶14

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/12/2024 at 15:03:31

¶15

The Arbitration Clause in the present case reads as under:-

¶16

“CLAUSE25

¶17

Except where otherwise provided in the contract, all questions and disputes relating to the meaning of the specifications, design, drawings and instructions herein before mentioned and as to the quality of workmanship or materials used on the work or as to any other question, claim, right, matter or thing whatsoever in any way arising out of or relating to the contract, designs, drawings, specifications, estimates, instructions, orders or these conditions or otherwise concerning the works or the execution or failure to execute the same whether arising during the progress of the work or after the cancellation, termination, completion or abandonment thereof shall be dealt with as mentioned hereinafter:

¶18

(i) If the contractor considers any work demanded of him to be outside the requirements of the contract, or disputes any drawings, record or decision given in writing by the Engineer in-Charge on any matter in connection with or arising out of the contract or carrying out of the work, to be unacceptable, he shall promptly within 15 days request the Superintending Engineer in writing for written instruction or decision. Thereupon, the Superintending Engineer shall give his written instructions or decision within a period of one month from the receipt of the contractor's letter.

¶19

If the Superintending Engineer fails to give his instructions or decision in writing within the aforesaid period or if the contractor is dissatisfied with the instructions or decision of the Superintending Engineer, the contractor may, within 15 days of the receipt of Superintending Engineer's decision, appeal to the Chief Engineer who shall afford an opportunity to the contractor to be heard, if the latter so desires, and to offer evidence in support of his appeal. The Chief Engineer shall give his decision within 30 days of receipt of contractor's appeal. If the contractor is

Page 2 of 5

ARB.P. 73/2024

dissatisfied with the decision of the Chief Engineer, the contractor may within 30 days from the receipt of the Chief Engineer decision, appeal before the Dispute Redressal Committee (DRC) along with a list of disputes with amounts claimed in respect of each such dispute and giving reference to the rejection of his disputes by the Chief Engineer. The Dispute Redressal Committee (DRC) shall give his decision within a period of 90 days from the receipt of Contractor's appeal. The constitution of Dispute Redressal Committee (DRC) shall be as indicated in Schedule 'F'. If the Dispute Redressal Committee (DRC) fails to give his decision within the aforesaid period or any party is dissatisfied with the decision of Dispute Redressal Committee (DRC), then either party may within a period of 30 days from the receipt of the decision of Dispute Redressal Committee (DRC), give notice to the Chief Engineer for appointment of arbitrator on prescribed proforma as per Appendix XV, failing which the said decision shall be final binding and conclusive and not referable to adjudication by the arbitrator.

¶24

It is a term of contract that each party invoking arbitration must exhaust the aforesaid mechanism of settlement of claims/disputes prior to invoking arbitration. (ii) Except where the decision has become final, binding and conclusive in terms of Sub Para(i) above, disputes or difference shall be referred for adjudication through arbitration by a sole arbitrator appointed by the Chief Engineer, CPWD, in charge of the work or if there be no Chief Engineer, the Additional Director General of the concerned region of CPWD or if there be no Additional Director General, the Special Director General or the Director General, CPWD. If the arbitrator so appointed is unable or unwilling to act or resigns his appointment or vacates his office due to any reason whatsoever, another sole arbitrator shall be appointed in the

Page 3 of 5

ARB.P. 73/2024

manner aforesaid. Such person shall be entitled to proceed with the reference from the stage at which it was left by his predecessor.

¶29

It is a term of this contract that the party invoking arbitration shall give a list of disputes with amounts claimed in respect of each such dispute along with the notice for appointment of arbitrator and giving reference to the rejection by the Chief Engineer of the appeal.

¶30

It is also a term of this contract that no person, other than a person appointed by such Chief Engineer CPWD or Additional Director General or Special Director General or Director General, CPWD, as aforesaid, should act as arbitrator and if for any reason that is not possible, the matter shall not be referred to arbitration at all.

¶31

It is also a term of this contract that if the contractor does not make any demand for appointment of arbitrator in respect of any claims in writing as aforesaid within 120 days of receiving the intimation from the Engineer-in-Charge that the final bill is ready for payment, the claim of the contractor shall be deemed to have· been waived and absolutely barred and the Government shall be discharged and released of all liabilities under the contract in respect of these claims. The arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) or any statutory modifications or reenactment thereof and the rules made thereunder and for the time being in force shall apply to the arbitration proceeding under this clause.

¶32

It is also a term of this contract that the arbitrator shall adjudicate on only such disputes as are referred to him by the appointing authority and give separate award against each dispute and claim referred to him and in all cases where the total amount of the claims by any party· exceeds Rs. 1,00,000/-, the arbitrator shall give reasons for the award.

Page 4 of 5

ARB.P. 73/2024

It is also a term of the contract that if any fees are payable to the arbitrator, these shall be paid equally by both the parties.

¶37

It is also a term of the contract that the arbitrator shall be deemed to have entered on the reference on the date he issues notice to both the parties calling them to submit their statement of claims and counter statement of claims. The venue of the arbitration shall be such place as may be fixed by the arbitrator in his sole discretion. The fees, if any, of the arbitrator shall, if required to be paid before the award is made and published, be paid half and half by each of the parties. The cost of the reference and of the award (including the fees, if any, of the arbitrator) shall be in the discretion of the arbitrator who may direct to any by whom and in what manner, such costs or any part thereof shall be paid and fix or settle the amount of cost to be so paid .”

¶38

In view of the above clause 25, the Petitioner had approached the Dispute Resolution Committee (hereinafter, DRC) on 21^st December, 2021. Thereafter, the notice invoking arbitration under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was issued on 7^th February, 2022. However, there has been no resolution of disputes between the parties. Considering these facts and circumstances, Mr. Bishwajit Dubey (9910224376), Advocate is appointed as the ld. Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. 6. The fee of the ld. Arbitrator shall be as per the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶39

The present petition is disposed of, along with all pending applications, if any.

¶40

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

¶41

FEBRUARY 14, 2024/ mr/dn

¶42

Page 5 of 5

¶43

ARB.P. 73/2024

¶44

Rk Jain and Sons Hospitality Services (P) Ltd. v. Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rk Jain and Sons Hospitality Services (P) Ltd. v. Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Infibeam Avenues Limited Formerly Known as Infibeam Incorporation Limited Vs Government Emarketplace & Anr.

M/S Carlsberg India Private Limited Vs M/S Sona Beverages Private Limited

Ajanta Soya Limited Vs the Oriental Insurance Company

Oriental Pathways Agra Pvt. Ltd. Vs National Highway Authority of India & Anr.

M/S Hindustan Industries Vs Surendra Kumar Saxena

Shri Anil Seth & Anr. Vs M/S Mega Construction Company & Ors.