IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 08.12.2011 Arb. Case No.5 of 2011 M/s A.N.Kapoor (Janitors) Pvt. Ltd. ...Petitioner Versus Post Graduate Institute of Medical ...Respondents Education & Research, Chandigarh & others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present : Mr. Harsh Aggarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Amit Aggarwal, Advocate, for the respondents. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act’) for appointment of an Arbitrator in respect of the disputes arising out an Agreement dated 20.07.2005. Vide the aforesaid agreement, the petitioner was awarded contract for providing Sanitation, House Keeping & Kitchen Services. As per the petitioner, a sum of Rs.59,78,247/- is due and payable for the work done and also for wrongful termination and the damages. In reply though the stand of the respondents is that the excess payment has been made, but learned counsel for the respondents states that the respondents are not insisting upon the recovery of the excess payment Arb. Case No.5 of 2011 made and that all the payments due in terms of the agreement stand made to the petitioner. The question; whether any payment is due to the petitioner or not, is a disputed question of fact. Such dispute is required to be decided by an Arbitrator in terms of Clause 42 of the Agreement, which reads as under: “In case of any dispute arising of the above agreement between the Medical Superintendent (on behalf of the DPGI) and (Managing Director on behalf of firm), the matter shall be referred to the Director of PGI, Chandigarh, for arbitration who decision shall be final and binding on both parties, in case of an legal dispute between the two parties, venue of the arbitration shall be at Chandigarh only.” In view of the said fact, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the Director, Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh to exercise its jurisdiction to decide the disputes between the parties. If, the Director fails to invoke its jurisdiction within a period of one month, it shall be open to the petitioner to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court again for appointment of an independent Arbitrator. 08.12.2011 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE 2