Allowed

Jose Thomas M v. Union of India

Kerala HC7 Dec 2018AR/58/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court directed the first opposite party to refer all claims in Annexure A4 to the existing Arbitral Tribunal. The Tribunal was authorized to decide arbitrability of those claims as a preliminary issue, rejecting the request for a new tribunal.

What did the court decide?

All claims in Annexure A4 directed to be referred to the existing Arbitral Tribunal; the Tribunal free to decide arbitrability as preliminary issue.

Jose Thomas M Vs Union of India — Arbitration | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

FRIDAY ,THE 07TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶5

AR.No. 58 of 2018

¶6

APPLICANT

¶7

JOSE THOMAS M

¶8

GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR, JOSE BUNGALOW, PIDAVOOR P.O., PATHANAPURAM, KOLLAM - 691625.

¶9

BY ADVS.

¶10

SRI.K.BABU THOMAS SMT.MARYKUTTY BABU

¶11

OPPOSITE PARTIES

¶12

1 UNION OF INDIA

¶13

REP. BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN, CHENNAI - 600003.

¶14

2 THE CHIEF ENGINEER (CONSTRUCTION), SOUTHERN RAILWAY, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682016.

¶15

BY ADVS. SRI.C.S.DIAS,SC, RAILWAYS

¶16

THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Arbitration Request No.58/2018

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner is a Contractor undertaking the

¶20

work of the 2^nd opposite party. Arbitral Tribunal is already appointed in respect of certain disputes which arose between the parties. Even though the petitioner has filed this request for appointment of an independent Arbitral Tribunal, the complaint of the applicant is that some of the claims in Annexure A4 are not referred to the Arbitral Tribunal. Claim A, B and C in Annexure A4 have been excluded from the matter which are already referred for arbitration.

¶21

2. Respondents have filed a counter affidavit opposing the request.

¶22

However it is seen that as per Annexure 12 order this Court has already referred similar claims to the Arbitral Tribunal. In the above circumstances, all the claims raised by the petitioner in Annexure A4 shall be referred to the Arbitral Tribunal. The first opposite party is directed to refer the claims in Annexure A4 to the Arbitral Tribunal. The Arbitral

¶23

Arbitration Request No.58/2018

¶24

:3:

¶25

Tribunal shall be free to decide the arbitrability of

¶26

those claims as a preliminary issue.

Sd/-

P.V.ASHA JUDGE

rkc

Arbitration Request No.58/2018

¶31

:4:

¶32

APPENDIX

¶33

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶34

ANNX A1: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE WITH CONTRACT VALUE OF RS.1,72,41,719.50

¶35

ANNX A2: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DEMANDING PAYMENT OF RS.1,53,73,780/-

¶36

ANNX A3: TRUE COPY OF DISPUTES NOTIFIED FOR ARBITRATION WITH CLAIMS FOR RS.76,79,519

¶37

ANNX A4: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION OF THE APPLICANT TO THE FIRST OPPOSITE PARTY DEMANDING REFERENCE OF THE EXCLUDED DISPUTES TO ARBITRATION

¶38

ANNX A5: TRUE COPY OF MINUTES OF THE HEARING HELD BY THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL

¶39

ANNX A6: TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.W.148/CN/TVC/ARB/NITI-AYOG ISSUED BY THE OPPOSTIE PARTIES FOR SHIFTING TO NEW PROCEDURE

¶40

ANNX A7: TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF THE APPLICANT INTIMATING REFUSAL TO WAIVE APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 12(5) OF THE ACT

¶41

ANNX A8: TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF THE APPLICANT TO THE OPPOSITE PARTIES AND MEMBERS OF THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL

¶42

ANNX A9: TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF THE APPLICANT APPOINTING HIS NOMINEE IN THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL

¶43

ANNX A10: TRUE COPY OF REPLY TO THE APPLICANT INTIMATING THAT ANNEXURE A7 IS NOT IN THE FORMAT SPECIFIED

¶44

ANNX A11: TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF THE APPLICANT TO THE OPPOSITE PARTIES AND MEMBERS OF THE ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL

¶45

ANNX A12: TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN AR NO.85/16 DIRECTING THE OPPOSITE PARTIES THEREIN, TO REFER THE EXCLUDED CLAIMS ALSO TO ARBITRATION

¶46

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBTIS:

¶47

EXT.R2(1): TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT.19.1.18 ISSUED BY 3RD OPPOSITE PARTY.

Jose Thomas M v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jose Thomas M v. Union of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Basil T.K. Vs Kerala Transport Development Finance Corporation Limited

C. Rajasekharan Vs State of Kerala

Shyju K.A. Vs Kerala Electrical and Allied Engineering Company Limited (Kel)

Vishnu R.C., Vs Travancore Devaswam Board

Ajith C.S. Vs Union of India

Jose Thomas M Vs Union of India