Disposed

Kamal Gupta, Proprietor of M/S Kamal Builders v. Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation

Delhi HC7 Nov 2025ARB.P./1628/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contractor sought appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) for non-payment of dues under a 2019 works agreement with DSIIDC containing a CPWD-style arbitration clause. The Court appointed Mr. Atul Kumar Garg, Former CE, CPWD, as sole arbitrator, directing arbitration under DIAC rules.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Atul Kumar Garg, Former CE, CPWD, as arbitrator; arbitration to proceed under DIAC rules and fee schedule.

Kamal Gupta, Proprietor of M/S Kamal Builders Vs Delhi State… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~7

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 1628/2025

¶4

KAMAL GUPTA, PROPRIETOR OF M/S KAMAL BUILDERS

¶5

.....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Ankur Mahindro, Mr. Rohan Taneja, Mr. Raghav Kalra, Mr. Animesh Dubey and Ms. Jhanak Setia, Advs.

¶7

versus

¶8

DELHI STATE INDUSTRIAL AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION .....Respondent

¶9

Through: Mr. Gaurav Goyal, Mr. Rohit Agarwal along with Mr. Nitin Nandwani, Advs.

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

¶11

O R D E R % 07.11.2025

¶12

The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the Petitioner seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes which have arisen between the Parties under an Agreement dated 10.06.2019.

¶13

Material on record indicates that the Petitioner was awarded a contract by the Respondent for “Development work in un-authorised colonies; C/o C.C. Interlocking Paver Block Road and S.W. drain at Sangam Vihar A- Block, New Delhi - 62 (Main Road) Deoli A.C (Regn. No. 921)” for a total amount of Rs. 2,29,55,736/- and subsequently an Agreement dated

¶14

Page 1 of 6

¶15

ARB.P. 1628/2025

¶16

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 13/11/2025 at 11:35:38

¶17

10.06.2019 was executed between the Petitioner and the Respondent. Disputes arose between the Parties on account of the non-payment of legitimate dues payable to the Petitioner by the Respondent. Material on record indicates that since payment was not made by the Respondent despite various correspondences sent by the Petitioner, a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 invoking arbitration was sent by the Petitioner to the Respondent on 27.03.2025.

¶18

Notice was issued in the petition on 08.10.2025.

¶19

Mr. Gaurav Goyal, learned Counsel, enters appearance on behalf of the Respondent.

¶20

Clause 25 of the General Conditions of the Contract (CPWD-2014 Edition), which is an arbitration clause, reads as under:

¶21

“Clause 25: Settlement of Disputes & Arbitration

¶22

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:

¶23

(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

¶24

Page 2 of 6

¶25

ARB.P. 1628/2025

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

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 13/11/2025 at 11:35:38

¶28

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.

¶29

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 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

¶30

Page 3 of 6

¶31

ARB.P. 1628/2025

¶32

This is a digitally signed order.

¶33

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 13/11/2025 at 11:35:38

¶34

binding and conclusive and not referable to adjudication by the arbitrator.

¶35

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.

¶36

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

¶37

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.

¶38

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 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.

¶39

It is also a term of this contract that if the contractor

¶40

Page 4 of 6

¶41

ARB.P. 1628/2025

¶42

This is a digitally signed order.

¶43

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 13/11/2025 at 11:35:38

¶44

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.

¶45

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.

¶46

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.

¶47

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. 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

¶48

Page 5 of 6

¶49

ARB.P. 1628/2025

¶50

This is a digitally signed order.

¶51

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 13/11/2025 at 11:35:38

¶52

or any part thereof shall be paid and fix or settle the amount of costs to be so paid.”

¶53

In view of the fact that disputes have arisen between the parties and the Agreement contains an arbitration clause, this Court is inclined to appoint an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties. 7. Accordingly, Mr. Atul Kumar Garg, Former CE, CPWD, (Mob. No.9868020537) is appointed as the Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the Parties. 8. The arbitration would take place under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and would abide by its rules and regulations. The learned Arbitrator shall be entitled to fees as per the Schedule of Fees maintained by the DIAC.

¶54

The learned Arbitrator is also requested to file the requisite disclosure under Section 12(2) of the 1996 Act within a week of entering on reference. 10. All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the claims/counter-claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Arbitrator on their merits, in accordance with law.

¶55

Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the contentions of the parties. 12. The present petition stands disposed of in the above terms along with pending application(s), if any.

¶56

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

¶57

NOVEMBER 7, 2025 S. Zakir

¶58

Page 6 of 6

¶59

ARB.P. 1628/2025

¶60

Kamal Gupta, Proprietor of M/S Kamal Builders v. Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kamal Gupta, Proprietor of M/S Kamal Builders v. Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation

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

Sh Ashok Arora Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi

Alexis Global Pvt. Ltd. Vs Oma Living Pvt. Ltd.

Jagjeet Singh Vs Delhi Development Authority

Shivaa Enterprises Vs Life Essentials Personal Care Pvt. Ltd.

Kamal Gupta Proprietor of M/S Kamal Builders Vs Delhi State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation

Writer Business Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Iffco Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd.