Disposed

M/S S K Construction v. the General Manager

Karnataka HC12 Feb 2021CMP/125/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a Civil Miscellaneous Petition seeking appointment of arbitrators. The Court directed the Railway respondent to send a panel of four names within 30 days following the procedure in Clause 64 of the General Conditions of Contract and the Supreme Court's decision in CORE.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the General Manager to constitute the Arbitral Tribunal within 30 days following the procedure in Clause 64(3) of the General Conditions of Contract as per CORE guidelines.

M/S S K Construction Vs the General Manager — Arbitration | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 12^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV

¶6

CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO.125/2020

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

M/s. S.K. Construction Rep. by its Managing Partner K.Sridhar Reddy S/o Sri. Venkatarami Reddy, Aged about 57 years, R/o Flat No.P1, Adarsh Blooms, No.6, I Main, Gopal Reddy Layout, Horamavu Main Road, Bangalore-560043.

¶9

... Petitioner

¶10

(By Sri. K. Sambasivam, Advocate)

¶11

AND:

¶12

The General Manager South Western Railway, Club Road, Keshavapur, Hubli-580023.

¶13

The Chief Engineer/North/Construction

¶14

South Western Railway, 18, Millers Road, Bangalore-560046.

¶15

…Respondents

¶16

(By Sri. Abhinay Y.T., Advocate)

¶17

¶18

This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying to secure the appointment of three Arbitrators in the Arbitral Tribunal to be constituted by the 1^st respondent under clause 64(3)(a)(ii) of the General Conditions of Contract (Annexures-D) and agreement for works dated 19.08.2011 (Annexure-C) for settlement of the disputes and claims arising out of the contract between the parties to the contract agreement and etc.

¶19

This Civil Miscellaneous Petition coming on for Orders , this day, the Court made the following:

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner which is the partnership firm is

¶22

stated to have been allotted works by the respondent

¶23

and during the course of execution of work disputes have arisen.

¶24

It is submitted that the petitioner had

¶25

issued a legal notice to the respondent invoking the arbitration clause as per notice dated 09.12.2013 at Annexure-K.

¶26

¶27

3. It is further submitted that in light of the

¶28

absence of concurrence as regards to the constitution of arbitral tribunal, present petition is filed.

¶29

Upon notice learned counsel

¶30

Sri.Abhinay.Y.T has appeared on behalf of the respondents.

¶31

During the course of hearing, both the learned counsel submit that the mode of appointment as followed in CMP No.137/2018 could be followed and matter to be disposed of.

¶32

It is the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex

¶33

Court in the case of Central Organisation for Railway Electrification v/s ECI-SPIC-SMO-MCML (JV) A Joint Venture Company reported in (2019)

¶34

SCC Online Sc 1635 that governs appointment of arbitrator as regards the present factual matrix also. In light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme

¶35

¶36

Court in particular with respect to adherence to the procedure in terms of Section 64(3)(b) of the General Conditions of Contract and taking note of the directions of Apex Court, the first respondent General Manager, South Western Railway is required to send a panel of atleast four names of retired Railway Officers who are empanelled to work as Railway Arbitrators to the contractor within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. Thereafter the petitioner contractor is required to exercise his choice of suggesting two names as his nominees within a period of 30 days. Thereafter, the General Manager will appoint at least one as contractor’s nominee and the General Manager will exercise his choice by nominating the balance number of Arbitrators indicating the name of Presiding Arbitrator from amongst the three Arbitrators so appointed. The General Manager is to complete the

¶37

¶38

exercise of constituting Arbitral Tribunal within 30

¶39

days from the date of receipt of names of contractor’s nominees.

¶40

Accordingly, in light of consent of both the parties, the petition is disposed off in light of the directions made above clarifying that the procedure under Section 64(3)(b) of the General Conditions of Contract to be adhered to while constituting the Arbitral Tribunal.

¶41

Accordingly, the petition is disposed off.

¶42

Sd/JUDGE

¶43

NS

M/S S K Construction v. the General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S S K Construction v. the General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P Manikandan Vs M/S Vaigai Thread Processors Pvt. Ltd.

Smt Malasani Linga Setty Sarala Vs the Income Tax Officer

Smt Malasani Veerannasetty Radhalaxmi Vs the Income Tax Officer

Mr M H Sachin Vs Mr S M Sunil

M/S. Mysore Sales International Limited Vs Commissioner of Customs (Preventive)

Sri Mohammed Daanish Zackria Vs M/S Paddy'S Properties LLP