The High Court · 2025

Arbitration Application filed under Section 1 1(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, R/w Scheme for Appointment of Arbitrator, 2000 praying that this Hon'ble Coud may be pleased to (a) appoint a person, conversant with disputes arising out of construction contracts as the nominee Arbitrator on behalf of the Respondent, in pursuance of Clause 26 (ii) of the Special Conditions of the Contract, annexed to letter of Acceptance (LOA) Work dated 19-05-2021 , (b) ln the alternative this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to appoint a sole arbitrator conversant with disputes arising out of construction contracts, in pursuance of Clause 26 (ii) of the Special Conditions of the Contract, annexed to letter of Acceptance (LOA) Work dated 19-05-2021 , (c) for costs. Counsel for the Applicant: Mr. P. Vishnuvardhan Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. Siddharth Gadugu, representing Ms. Shireen Sethna Baria The Court made the following: ORDER ; ,ry HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. LAKSHMAN ARR ITRATION APPLICATION No.272 OF 2024 ORAL ORDER: Heard Mr. P. Vishnuvardhan, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Siddharth Gadugu, leamed counsel representing Ms. Shireen Sethna Baria. leamed counsel for the respondent.

2. The respondent has issued Letter of Acceptance (LOA), dated 19.05.2021 lbr Onsite Structural Fabrication Works for CDU- VDU of HRRL Barmer Project in favour of the applicant oru the I specific terms and sonditions made therein. According to the applicant. it has executed the said work in terms of LOA. .It is entitled to an amount of Rs.4.60 Crores. Despite repeated requests made by it, the respondent did not pay the said amount. Therefore, invoking arbitration clause ol the Special Conditions to the Conftact annexed to the said LOA, the applicant has sent e-mail dated 09.05.2024 to the respondent with a request. to propose sole Arbitrator in terms of the said LOA. Despite receiving and acknowledging the said e-mail, respondent did not respond to the same. Therefore, the applicant filed the present arbitration application. 2 KL,J Arb.Appl.No.272 of 2024 f'r

3. Mr. Siddharth Gadugu, learned counsel representing Ms' Shireen Sethna Bari4 leamed counsel for the responden! on instructions, would submit that the respondent has no objection in appointing an arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the appticant and the respondent. However, liberty may be given to the respondent to raise all the contentions and grounds which they have raised in the present application before the Arbitrator' .'

4. Clause - 26 0I) of the Special Conditions to the Contract annexed to the LOA deals with 'arbitration', which is rdievant and the same is extracted as under: "26.II) Arbitration: The TPL and the Contractor shall make every effort to resolve amicably by direct inlormal negotiation any disagreement or dispute arising between them either under or in connection with the Contract. Ifafter 30 days from the commencement of such informal negotiations, the TPL and the Contractor have been unable'to resolve amicably a Contract dispute, the same shall be referred for resolution to a single arbitrator in case the parties can agree upon one, otherwise to two arbitrators, one to be appointed by each party and an umpire to be appointed by the two KL,J Arb.Appl.No.272 of 2024 ' arbitrators. The arbitration shall be carried out in accordance with and subject to the provisions of the tndian Arbitration and Reconciliation Act.

1996. or any statutory modification or reenactment thereof lor the time being in force. The decision of the arbitrator/umpire shall be final and binding upon both parties. The venue for Arbitration shall be Hyderabad, Telangana (India)- Execution of the Contract shall be continued by the Contractor during the arbitration proceedings unless otherwise directed in writing bY the TPL." a' 5. It is the specific case of the applicant that it has executed the aforesaid work pursuant to the l-OA, dated 19.05.2021. There is no complaint against the applicant herein. It is entitled for an amount of I Rs.4.60 Crores. The respondent is not paying the said amount. There is no response from the respondent to the aforesaid e-mail dated \

09.05.2024. Therefore, there are disputes between the applicant and the respondent which are arbitrable in nature to be adjudicated by an ( Arbitrator.

6. The present arbitration application is accordingly allowed, and Sri Justice M. Seetharama Murti, Former Judge, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, R/o Flat No.602, 'A' Block, White I I 4 KL,J Arb.Appl.No.272 of 2024 ('l House Apartments, H.No.8-2-67412 &2A, Road No.13, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana State - 500 034 (Mobile # 9440405308 & email Id: [email protected]), is appointed as an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the applicant and the respondent. Liberry is granted to both the parties to raise all the contentions and grounds which they have raised in the present application before the leamed Arbitrator, and it is for the leamed Arbitrator to considbi the same. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the Arbitration Application shall stand closed //TRUE COPY// Sd/. M. VIJAYA BHAS ER JOINT REGIS RAR SECTION OFFICER \ To,

1. Sri Justice M, Seetharama Murti, Former Judge, High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Amaravati, R/o Flat No.602, 'A' Block, White House Apartments. H.NI.B-2-67 412 & 24, Road No 13, Banjara Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana State - 500 034 (Mobile # 9440405308 & email ld: [email protected]) (By Special Messenger) (Along with a Copy of affidavit and material papers)

2. One CC to Mr. P. Vishnuvardhan, Advocate [OPUC] 3. One CC to Ms. Shireen Sethna Barra, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD Copies kam/gh HIGH COURT DATED:1210212025 I 1HE ST4 14: J o o lil70 A c) ORDER ARBAPPL.No.272 ot 2024 t- t) l" ALLOWING THE ARBITRATION APPLICATION