S R.K. Construction Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Director Smt. Neelam Singh v. Madhyanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd. Thru. M.D. And Anr

1. Heard Shri Ezaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate holding brief of Sri Amal Rastogi, the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

2. On 28.10.2025 this court had passed the following order: "1. Heard Sri Ezaz Ahmad Khan, the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The office has reported on 01.09.2025 that notice issued to the respondents has been served, but no one has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents.

3. By means of the instant application filed under Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 the petitioner has prayed for appointment of Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the petitioner and the respondents arising out of an agreement dated 19.11.2013 between the parties.

4. Notice was issued to the opposite parties which has been served but the opposite parties have not put in appearance and has not filed any objection against the application.

5. The copy of agreement dated 19.11.2013 entered into between the parties has been annexed with the application, Clause 38 whereof contains arbitration clause which is as follows: "38. If any dispute, difference or controversy shall at any time arise between the Contractor on the one hand and the UPPCL and the Engineer of the Contract on the other hand Contract, or as the true construction, meaning and 2 ARBT No. 88 of 2025 intent of any part or condition of the same or as to manner of execution or as to the quality or description of or the payment for the same, or as to the true intent, meaning, interpretation construction or effect of the clause of the contract specification or drawing or any of them or as to anything to be, done committed or suffered in pursuance of the contract or specification, or as in the mode of carrying the contract into effect or as to the breach or alleged breach or as to obviating or compensation for the commission any of such breach or as to any other matter or thing whatsoever connected with or arising out of the contract, and whether before or during the progress or after the completion of the contract such question, difference or dispute shall be referred for adjudication to the M.D., UPPCL or any other person nominated by him on this behalf and his decision on writing shall be final binding and conclusive. This submission shall be deemed to be a submission to arbitration modification thereof. The arbitrator may from time to time with consent of the parties, enlarge the time for making and publishing the award."

6. The petitioner has sent a notice dated 04.11.2024 to the respondents stating that three orders were supplied to the petitioner in furtherance of the agreement dated 19.11.2013 for supply of material for erection, testing and commissioning for feeders and for civil work which was completed by the petitioner. The petitioner raised a bill for total amount of Rs.3,00,00,854.59 against which Rs.2,93,50,532.47 were sanctioned and approved by the concerned authority but the petitioner has paid merely a sum of Rs.1,34,23,915.12 and Rs.1,12,10,419/- remained unpaid. Through the letter dated 14.12.2021 the Superintending Engineer of respondent has disputed some of the measurements and quantity of work done in the said project.This has gave rise to a dispute between the parties, which is covered by the arbitration clause contained in the agreement dated 19.11.2013.

7. The petitioner proposed the names of two former Judges of this court for being appointed as Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties, but in spite of service of notice the respondents did not give any reply.

8. As has already been noted above, the respondents have not filed any reply to this application under Section 11 (6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 also. The aforesaid facts clearly make out a case for reference of disputes for adjudication through the process of arbitration.

9. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of this case, this court proposes the name of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anurag Kumar (Former Judge of this Court), Resident of House No.5/501, Deepak Delux, Sahara Grace, Jankipuram, Lucknow, Contact No.9415286898 to act as an Arbitrator in the present case to settle the dispute between the parties. 3 ARBT No. 88 of 2025

10. Let the disclosures on the format and consent of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anurag Kumar (Former Judge of this Court) be obtained by the office in terms of the provisions contained in Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) and IInd Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1995 by sending a letter along with copy of this application to him.

11. List this case immediately after receipt of consent of the proposed arbitrator."

3. The proposed Arbitrator Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anurag Kumar (Former Judge of this Court), Resident of House No.5/501, Deepak Delux, Sahara Grace, Jankipuram, Lucknow, Contact No.9415286898 has signified his consent to act as an Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes between the parties through letter dated 10.11.2025, which is accompanied by disclosure under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1)(b) and VIth and VIIth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1995.

4. Accordingly, the application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is allowed. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anurag Kumar, (a Former Judge of this Court), resident of 5/501, Deepak Delux, Sahara Grace, Jankipuram, Lucknow, (U.P) Mobile No.9415286898 is hereby appointed as an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties.

5. The office is directed to communicate this order to the Arbitrator Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anurag Kumar, (a Former Judge of this Court). November 27, 2025 Ram. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

1. Heard Shri Ezaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate holding brief of Sri Amal Rastogi, the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

2. On 28.10.2025 this court had passed the following order: "1. Heard Sri Ezaz Ahmad Khan, the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The office has reported on 01.09.2025 that notice issued to the respondents has been served, but no one has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents.

3. By means of the instant application filed under Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 the petitioner has prayed for appointment of Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the petitioner and the respondents arising out of an agreement dated 19.11.2013 between the parties.

4. Notice was issued to the opposite parties which has been served but the opposite parties have not put in appearance and has not filed any objection against the application.

5. The copy of agreement dated 19.11.2013 entered into between the parties has been annexed with the application, Clause 38 whereof contains arbitration clause which is as follows: "38. If any dispute, difference or controversy shall at any time arise between the Contractor on the one hand and the UPPCL and the Engineer of the Contract on the other hand Contract, or as the true construction, meaning and 2 ARBT No. 88 of 2025 intent of any part or condition of the same or as to manner of execution or as to the quality or description of or the payment for the same, or as to the true intent, meaning, interpretation construction or effect of the clause of the contract specification or drawing or any of them or as to anything to be, done committed or suffered in pursuance of the contract or specification, or as in the mode of carrying the contract into effect or as to the breach or alleged breach or as to obviating or compensation for the commission any of such breach or as to any other matter or thing whatsoever connected with or arising out of the contract, and whether before or during the progress or after the completion of the contract such question, difference or dispute shall be referred for adjudication to the M.D., UPPCL or any other person nominated by him on this behalf and his decision on writing shall be final binding and conclusive. This submission shall be deemed to be a submission to arbitration modification thereof. The arbitrator may from time to time with consent of the parties, enlarge the time for making and publishing the award."

6. The petitioner has sent a notice dated 04.11.2024 to the respondents stating that three orders were supplied to the petitioner in furtherance of the agreement dated 19.11.2013 for supply of material for erection, testing and commissioning for feeders and for civil work which was completed by the petitioner. The petitioner raised a bill for total amount of Rs.3,00,00,854.59 against which Rs.2,93,50,532.47 were sanctioned and approved by the concerned authority but the petitioner has paid merely a sum of Rs.1,34,23,915.12 and Rs.1,12,10,419/- remained unpaid. Through the letter dated 14.12.2021 the Superintending Engineer of respondent has disputed some of the measurements and quantity of work done in the said project.This has gave rise to a dispute between the parties, which is covered by the arbitration clause contained in the agreement dated 19.11.2013.

7. The petitioner proposed the names of two former Judges of this court for being appointed as Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties, but in spite of service of notice the respondents did not give any reply.

8. As has already been noted above, the respondents have not filed any reply to this application under Section 11 (6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 also. The aforesaid facts clearly make out a case for reference of disputes for adjudication through the process of arbitration.

9. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances of this case, this court proposes the name of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anurag Kumar (Former Judge of this Court), Resident of House No.5/501, Deepak Delux, Sahara Grace, Jankipuram, Lucknow, Contact No.9415286898 to act as an Arbitrator in the present case to settle the dispute between the parties. 3 ARBT No. 88 of 2025

10. Let the disclosures on the format and consent of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anurag Kumar (Former Judge of this Court) be obtained by the office in terms of the provisions contained in Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) and IInd Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1995 by sending a letter along with copy of this application to him.

11. List this case immediately after receipt of consent of the proposed arbitrator."

3. The proposed Arbitrator Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anurag Kumar (Former Judge of this Court), Resident of House No.5/501, Deepak Delux, Sahara Grace, Jankipuram, Lucknow, Contact No.9415286898 has signified his consent to act as an Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes between the parties through letter dated 10.11.2025, which is accompanied by disclosure under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1)(b) and VIth and VIIth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1995.

4. Accordingly, the application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is allowed. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anurag Kumar, (a Former Judge of this Court), resident of 5/501, Deepak Delux, Sahara Grace, Jankipuram, Lucknow, (U.P) Mobile No.9415286898 is hereby appointed as an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties.

5. The office is directed to communicate this order to the Arbitrator Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anurag Kumar, (a Former Judge of this Court). November 27, 2025 Ram. (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench