The High Court · 2025

M/s lL & Fs Engineering And Constructions Company Limited, A company incorporated and registered under the Laws of lndia, having its registered office at: 8-2-11,p1113/3/4F, Sanali lnfo Park, Cyber Towers, Road No-2, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad-500033, Rep by its Authorized Representative & Dy [Vanager Legal Mr. Chinthakunta Rangaiahbabu ...Applicant

1. B.K. STEEL, Having office at: Plot No. D-54/1 , Road No-23, Gate No4, Hojiwala Industrial Estate, Sachin - Palasana Road, Surat, Gujarat - 394230. Represented by its Partner

2. I\Ir. Bhaumik Gandhi, Partner of B.K. Steel, Having office at. Plot No. D-54/'1, Road No-23, Gate No-4, Hojiwala lndustrial Estate, Sachin - Palasana Road, Surat, Gujarat - 394230.

3. Mr. Priyank Ketanbhai Gandhi, Partner of B.K. Steel, Having office at: plot No. D-54/1, Road No-23, Gate No-4, Hojiwala lndustrial Estate, Sachin - palasana Road, Surat, Gujarat - 394230. ...Respondents Arbitration Application under Section 1 1(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to appoint a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the claims and disputes arising out of Purchase Order dated 23-02-2023 between the Applicant and Respondent. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. R.S.Phani, counsel representing Mr. N. Jeevan Kumar Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared The Court made the following: ORDER ',*:. WV 1 -: .r: i., ./,. ,1 THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KTIMAR SINGH ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.76 of 2o25 ORDER: Mr. R.S.Phani, learned counsel' representing Mr. N.Jeeval Kuamr, learned counsel for the applicant

2. By order dated 01.08.2025, this Court proposed to appoint Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari, a former Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court as an independent Arbitrator to adjudicate the drspute between the parties. The order dated 0i.O8.2025 is extracted hereunder for easy reference: "Mr. R.S.Phani, learned counsel representing Mr. N.Jeeval Kumar, Iearned counsel for the applicant. Heard learned counsel for the appiicant. Respondent Nos.2 and 3, who are the partners of respondent No.1 partnership frrm have not appeared despite valid service of notice. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the legal notice dated 28.O 1.2025, Annexure P9, for invocation of arbitration Clause 21 und.er thc Purchase Order dated 23.C2.2O23 for appointment of sole Arbitrator for adjudication of the dispute between the parties has remained unreplied. Applicant had made al advalce payment of Rs.4,61,04,O751- on 27.02.2023 to the respondents through online mode against Purchase Order d.ated 23.O2.2O23 for supply of 635 MT TMT Bars for the "Surat Metro Project" undertaken by the applicant. Despite full advance paJ,-rnent, the respondents have i 2 failed to supply the entire agreed quantity of 653 MT TMT Bars, instead they have delivered only about hatf the quantity ald have neither supplied the remaining materials nor refunded the amount equivalent to the shortfall. The respondents made several attempts to amicably resolve the dispute and a meeting was also held on 13.o4.2023 wherein the respondents undertgok to supply the material in a periodica-l manner. The applicant has also lodged a complaint before Altllan Police, Surat on 11.04.2023, but no action has been taken. Later, the respondents further gave an undertaking on 14.06.2O23 for resumption of the suppty of materials from 10.O7.2023. Howevcr, only 37 Metric Tonnes of supplies were made on 17 .O7 .2023. The respondents were further requested through e-mail dated 27.11.2023 to resume supplies within 10 days, but no supplies were made. Thereafter, the applicant has invoked the arbitration ciause 21 provided under the Purchase Order dated 23.O2.2O23, which reads as under: "21. ArbitEtion: In the event of any dispute/differences arising out of this purchase order or dilference of opinion between the parties on any point in the purchase order arising out of or in connection with the purchasc order or wiLh regard Lo pcrformance of any obligation hercunder by either party, thc partles hereto shall use their bcst efforts to settlc such disputes or diffcrence oI opinion amicably by mutuaL negotiations. In case, no agreement is reached within 30 days from the date of such dispute/difference, either party may forthwith give to the other, a notice in writing of the existence of such question, dispute or difference of opinion and their intention of invoking the arbitration under the provisions of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 along with any amendments or re-enactments thereof- The rules there under or any statutory modification thereof for t]le time bcing in force shall prevail- The arbitrator shall be appointcd by the CEO of IECCL and the other party shall have no objection regarding t}Ie nomination of such arbltrator being an employee of IECCL or IL&FS Group. The place of arbitration shall be at Hyderabad and the language used shall be English. The award pronounced by the Arbitral Tribunal shall be Iinal and binding on the parties." It is submitted that on failure of the respondents to respond to the notice for arbitration, the applicant has approached this Court I I ) . 3 for appointment of an independent Arbitrator under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with Section 3(i)(d) of Scheme for appointment of Arbitrator as framed by this Court. l,earned counsel for the applicant submits that since the respondents have failed to respond to the nolice, this Court may appoint an independent Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. I have considered the submission of learned counsei for the applicant and taken note of the arbitration Clause 2 I under the Purchase Order dated 23.02.2023. It appears that respondent Nos.2 and 3, who ar-e partners of respondent No.1 partnership hrm, have neither chosen to respond to the notice for invoking the arbitration clause nor appeared despite valid service of notice. In such circumstances and on being satisfied with the plea raised, this Court proposes to appoint Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari, a former Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court (residing at Plot No.A-38, H.No.2-2-la/31/C2, Durgabai Deshmukh Colony, Sri Ramachandra Collage Lane, Baghamberpet, Hyderabad- 13, Phone No.9849398609), as an independent Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. The proposed Arbitrator is requested to submit her consent and a declaration in terms of Section 12(1) read with Schedule VI of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Registry is directed to cornmunicate this order to the proposed Arbitrator. The matter be listed after two weeks with the response, if any, of the proposed Arbitrator."

3. The proposed Arbitrator has submitted her consent along with a declaration under Section 12 ( 1) read with Schedule VI of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by \ \ letter dated 1 2.08.2025 +

4. Learned counsel for the applicant, therefore, submits that appointment of the proposed Arbitrator may be conlirmed.

5. In that view of the matter, I hereby appoint Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari, a former Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court (residing at Plot No.A-38, H.No.2 2- lB/31/C2, Durgabai Deshmukh Colony, Sri Ramachandra Collage Lane, Baghamberpet, Hyderabad-13, phone No.9849398609) to act as an independent Arbitrator in respect of the dispute between the parties.

6. Registry is directed to serve a xerox copy of the entire pleadings to the learned Arbitrator. The learned Arbitrator is requested to keep in mind the fee prescribed in Scheduie IV of the Act and the time limit prescribed under Section 29A of the Act. 7 . The Arbitration Application is, accordingly, disposed of. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall staad closed. SD/- SMT K.SHYLESHI JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER 1. Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari, former Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court (residing at Ptot No.A-38, H.No.2_2_1Bt31tC2 Durgabai Deshmukh Colony, Sri Ramachandra Collage Lane, Baghambe rpet, Hyderabad-.13, phone No.9849398609) (By Special Messenger)(Arong with a copy of affidavit and material papers) To, til, karn/nvh

2. OneCC to Mr. N. Jeevan Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 3. Two CD Copies --a".aia:,*.:F*___:_,_-_ -__. 2-/n HIGH COURT DATED:2210912025 ORDER ARBAPPL.No.76 of 2025 IASEH1 ,'c \J() ?s rr1$ 2t5 F * SPAT * DISPOSING OF THE ARBITRATION APPLICATION 4