Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Navin Chawla

DECISION

Navin Chawla, J.

1. This petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties with respect to the Contract dated 18.09.2018 for Construction of Phase-II works comprising Director's Residence, Type II, III, IV and V Residential quarters for National Institute of Animal Biotechnology (NIAB) at Hyderabad.

2. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the present petition is premature as the petitioner has not followed the procedure prescribed for appointment of an Arbitrator. Drawing reference to Clause 25 of the General Conditions of Contract (in short, the 'GCC'), he submits that prior to invoking arbitration, the petitioner has to raise its disputes with the Reviewing Authority, and if it is dissatisfied with its decision, approach the Appealing Authority. If the petitioner still is dissatisfied with the decision of Appealing Authority, the petitioner has to raise its dispute with the Dispute Redressal Committee (in short, the 'DRC'). It is only where the petitioner or the respondent is dissatisfied with the decision of the DRC, that arbitration can be invoked.

3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the above procedure cannot be considered as a pre-condition for invocation of the Arbitration Agreement between the parties, inasmuch as the Reviewing Authority, the Appealing Authority, and even the DRC are constituted by the officers of the respondents. He submits that these Authorities, therefore, cannot fairly adjudicate the disputes between the parties. He submits that as the respondents terminated the Agreement and invoked the Bank Guarantee submitted by the petitioner, therefore, the petitioner cannot expect any relief from the respondents.

4. In my opinion, the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner cannot be accepted.

5. The Clause 25 of the GCC, so far as is relevant to the present petition, is reproduced herein below:

"SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES & ARBITRATION

Except where otherwise provided in the contract, all questions and disputes relating to the meaning of the specifications, design, drawings and instructions here-in 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:

(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 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 authority indicating in schedule 'F" (Reviewing Authority) in writing for written instruction or decision. Thereupon, the Reviewing Authority shall give his written instructions or decision within a period of one month from the receipt of the contractor's letter.

If the Reviewing Authority 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 Reviewing Authority, the contractor may, within 15 days of the receipt of the Reviewing Authority's decision, appeal to the authority as indicated in schedule 'F" (Appealing Authority) who shall ........