Petitioner sought arbitrator appointment under Section 11 for a construction contract dispute. The Court found a dispute existed regarding the validity of a full and final settlement receipt alleged to be signed under pressure. A former judge was appointed to decide the dispute.
Appointment of former Judge N.K. Aggarwal as arbitrator to decide the dispute.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Arbitration Case No. 11 of 2011 Date of Decision: 13.7.2011
Pooja Enterprises
.....Petitioner
Vs.
DSC Limited
….Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Shri P.S.Rana, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Shri Rohit Khanna, Advocate, for the respondent.
Hemant Gupta, J
Petitioner has sought appointment of arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for settlement of disputes and differences relating to construction of embankment with earth work from 95.00 KMs to 100 kms in pursuance of the Agreement dated 4.12.2008.
Petitioner was allotted the work of construction of embankment of earth work with the contract price of Rs. 2,02,00,000/with completion period of eight months from the issue of work order. The work is said to be illegally terminated and a sum of Rs. 32,05,967/- was claimed as the amount due and payable to the petitioner but an amount of Rs. 14,75,251/- was paid after obtaining the no due certificate by undue pressure as alleged by the petitioner. Thus, the petitioner has raised dispute in respect of the balance payment by serving a demand notice dated 28.9.2010. Since, the arbitrator was not appointed, the petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of this Court.
In reply, respondent, inter alia, asserted that the petitioner received an amount of Rs. 14,75,251/- in full and final settlement of all their dues, claims and demands and thus, there is no dispute which is
[ 2]
Arbitration Case No. 11 of 2011
required to be decided by the Arbitrator. The full and final settlement is dated 29.7.2010.
The petitioner has disputed the said settlement in the notice dated 28.9.2010. It is alleged that since there was huge amount due and payable to the petitioner and the amount was not being paid, the petitioner under pressure has signed the full and final settlement receipt.
The question whether the full and final settlement receipt is the result of undue pressure is disputed question of fact. Thus, there exist disputes including the dispute regarding the due full and final receipt. Such disputes are required to be decided by an Arbitrator.
In view of the said fact, Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.K.Aggarwal, former judge of this Court resident of H. No. 305, Public Society No. 34/5, Mansa Devi Complex, Panchkula is appointed as the arbitrator to decide the dispute between the parties including the legality and validity of the full and final settlement receipt dated 29.7.2010. Learned Arbitrator shall fix his fee in consultation with the parties.
Disposed of.
(Hemant Gupta) Judge
13.7.2011 preeti
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a dispute exists regarding the construction contract termination and balance payment.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Pooja Enterprises
DSC Limited
Hemant Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
