2. This matter came up for hearing before this Court on 11th December, 2018 when notice was issued. Subsequently an application for early hearing was filed on behalf of the petitioner which was allowed by this Court on 9th September, 2021. The respondent has filed a reply and the petitioner has also filed a rejoinder.
3. The brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition are set out hereinafter:
3.1 On 20th October, 2019, a Letter of Intent was issued by the respondent to the petitioner for supply, installation and commissioning of electric works at the District Hospital Project at Gurgaon, Bhiwani and Hissar in Haryana. Letter of Intent was duly executed and signed between the parties at New Delhi. It was the contention of the petitioner that the respondent wrongly withheld an amount of Rs. 12,24,181/- in respect of bills raised by the petitioner on the respondent which led to filing of a recovery suit for an amount of Rs. 17,26,000/- before the court of ADJ on 22nd September, 2017. In the said suit, an application under Section 8 of the Act was filed on behalf of the respondent seeking that the parties may be referred to arbitration in terms of the arbitration clause contained in the Letter of Intent. On 22nd December, 2017, an application under Order 12 Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, (CPC), 1908, was filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking decree on the basis of admissions made by the respondent.
3.2 The application filed on behalf of the respondent under Section 8 of the Act was allowed by the impugned order observing - holding as follows:
(i) There was a comprehensive arbitration clause between the parties in terms of which the clear intention of the parties was reflected that the disputes between them had to be resolved through arbitration.
(ii) The application under Section 8 of the Act was filed by the respondent before filing the written statement.
(iii) The petitioner had admitted the receipt of Annexures 1, 2 and 3 to the Letter of Intent and therefore, a legally binding contract was entered into between the parties, even if the said annexures did not bear the signatures of the petitioner.
(iv) Petitioner has nowhere denied the existence of arbitration agreement contained in the documents annexed with the Letter of Intent.
(v) In a similar matter being CS(COMM.) 601/2017 titled as A.S. Nutech Electrical Pvt. Ltd. v. M/s. Larsen & Toubro Ltd., this Court has already referred the matter for arbitration and the petitioner is one of the directors in the said plaintiff company.
(vi) The petitioner had deliberately withheld the proceedings in CS(COMM.) 601/2017 as well as the complete documents that were annexures to the Letter of Intent.
(vii) Judgment of this Court in Fenner India Ltd. V. Brahmaputra Valley Fertilizer Corporation Ltd., MANU/DE/0048/2016 : 227 (2016) DLT 285 is not applicable to the facts of the case as there is no specific admission on the part of the r........