IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : 31.03.2011 Arb. Case No.9 of 2011 M/s Longia Brothers ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present : Mr. Raman Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. P.S.Thiara, Addl. AG, Punjab, for the respondents. HEMANT GUPTA, J. (ORAL) The petitioner has sought appointment of an Arbitrator in respect of the disputes between the parties arising out of an Agreement dated 26.12.2006. Vide the aforesaid Agreement, the petitioner was given contract of providing sewerage at Village Kullar Block Shahkot, District Kapurthala (Providing Lowering, Jointing & Cutting of S.W.Pipe & Construction for M.H.Chambers & all other works contingent thereto) at the approximate cost of Rs.47.93 lacs. The petitioner alleged to have commenced the work on 27.12.2006 and completed the same on 30.04.2008. The petitioner submitted bill of Rs.53,54,000/- on 25.05.2008, but complete payment was not released. The Department also did not release the payment of Rs.1,75,000/- in respect of construction of screening chamber constructed for disposal of sullage water. The petitioner claimed a sum of Arb. Case No.9 of 2011 Rs.33,77,000/- as balance amount after adjusting the amounts already received by way of notice dated 28.01.2009. The petitioner earlier filed a writ petition bearing CWP No.2035 of 2010 before this Court for release of due payment. The said writ petition was disposed of with a direction to the Chief Engineer (North), Water Supply & Sanitation, Punjab, Patiala to decide the legal notice. In terms of such directions, an order has been passed on 18.11.2010, whereby a payment of Rs.1,19,825/- has been ordered to be released while declining the claim of the petitioner on account of other heads. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in the said order, a sum of Rs.3,13,200/- is ordered to be recovered from the petitioner. The petitioner raised demand for appointment of an Arbitrator on 09.12.2010 (Annexure P-3) i.e. within 180 days of the payment of the final bill as contemplated under Clause 25 (vii) of the Agreement, which reads as under: “25 (vii). The reference to the Arbitrator shall be made by the claimant party within one hundred twenty days from the date of dispute of claim arises during the execution of work. If the claim pertains to rates or recoveries introduced in the final bill, the reference to the Arbitrator shall be made within six calendar months from the date of payment of the final bill to the contractor or from the date a registered notice is sent to the contractor to the effect that his final bill is ready by the Engineer-in-Charge (whose decision in this respect shall be final and binding) which ever is earlier.” The stand of the respondents in the written statement is that claim of the petitioner is time barred and that the petitioner is not entitled for appointment of an arbitrator. The respondents have released payment and passed an order on 18.11.2010. May be the said order was passed after the issuance of the 2 Arb. Case No.9 of 2011 directions by this Court, but the fact remains that certain payments have been made in pursuance of such order. Therefore, the starting point of the cause of action to claim adjudication of the disputes is the date of part payment and declining the claim of the petitioner in respect of remaining disputes i.e. 18.11.2010. The petitioner has sought appointment of an Arbitrator on 09.12.2010 that is within thirty days of the payment. Thus, it cannot be said, that the claim of the petitioner is beyond limitation. The respondents have not appointed any Arbitrator so far. The disputes between the parties in respect of claim raised by the petitioner and by the respondents are required to be adjudicated upon by an Arbitrator in terms of Clause 25(vii) of the Agreement. Consequently, Shri Kishan Jit Singh, Chief Engineer (Retd), Chandigarh Administration, resident of H.No.140, Sector-40 A, Chandigarh is appointed as an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon all the disputes arising between the parties. The Arbitrator shall be free to fix his fee in consultation with the parties on the first date of hearing. It shall be open to the parties to approach this court, if need arises. 31.03.2011 (HEMANT GUPTA) Vimal JUDGE 3