MANU/SC/0445/2019

True Court CopyTM English

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 3303 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 6312 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3306 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 6034 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3304 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 2166 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3307 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 6316 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3312 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 7720 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3310 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 8019 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3311 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 8021 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3305 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 7937 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3308 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 8597 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3319 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 8256 of 2019), (Arising out of Diary No. 8885/2018), Civil Appeal No. 3309 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 8596 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3314 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 9514 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3313 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 8598 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3315 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 9559 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3317 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 11417 of 2018), Civil Appeal No. 3318 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP No. 11862 of 2018) and Civil Appeal No. 3316 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 22263 of 2018)

Decided On: 29.03.2019

Appellants: Union of India (UOI)
Vs.
Respondent: Parmar Construction Company

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
A.M. Khanwilkar and Ajay Rastogi

JUDGMENT

Ajay Rastogi, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The question that arises for consideration in the batch of appeals by special leave is as to whether (1) the High Court was justified in invoking amended provision which has been introduced by Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment Act), 2015 with effect from 23rd October, 2015 (hereinafter being referred to as "Amendment Act, 2015"); (2) whether the arbitration agreement stands discharged on acceptance of the amount and signing no claim/discharge certificate and (3) whether it was permissible for the High Court Under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (prior to the Amendment Act, 2015) to appoint third party or an independent Arbitrator when the parties have mutually agreed for the procedure vis-a-vis the authority to appoint the designated arbitrator. The High Court has passed separate orders in exercise of its powers Under Section 11(6) of the Act, 1996 in appointing an independent arbitrator without adhering to the mutually agreed procedure under the agreement executed between the parties. Since the batch of appeals involve common questions of law and facts with the consent of parties, are disposed off by the present judgment.

3. The facts have been noticed from civil appeal arising out of SLP(Civil) No. 2166 of 2018.

4. The work for construction of office accommodation for officer and rest house was allotted to the Respondent contractor, at Dungarpur in the State of Rajasthan on 21st December, 2011. As alleged, the extension was granted by the Appellants to complete the work by 31st March, 2013. The measurement was accepted by the Respondent under protest and when Appellants officials failed to clear 7th final bill until the Respondent put a line over "under protest" and signed no claim certificate. The total value of the work executed was of Rs. 58.60 lakhs against which Rs. 55.54 lakhs was paid and escalation cost was not added with interest @ 18% over delay payment. Demand notice was sent to the Appellants to appoint an arbitrator invoking Clause 64(3) of the GCC to resolve the disputes/differences on 23<........