1 ARBAP89.07 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 89 OF 2007 M/s. Marvel Electricals Equipments P.L. ... Applicant Vs 1. Union of India & anr. ... Respondents Mr. Toni S. Sachdevani for the Applicant. Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Respondents. CORAM : S.J. VAZIFDAR, J. DATED : 15TH JULY, 2010. P.C. : 1. This is an application under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for appointment of an Arbitrator. 2. There is no dispute that the contract was entered into between the parties, which contains an arbitration clause viz. clause 64 in the General Conditions of Contract, which are applicable to the parties. 2 ARBAP89.07 3. The only question which requires any consideration is whether there is any live claim between the parties in view of the fact that even according to the Applicant, the work was completed on 31st May, 2000. However, the matter is not free from doubt. For instance, it is not clear whether the final bill was raised and processed. There is no affidavit in reply. 4. It is, however, clarified that the defence raised on merits on behalf of the Respondent is an important one and no doubt the arbitral tribunal will furnish adequate reasons in that regard especially in respect of clause 64(1)(iv) and the effect thereof on the present claim. In the facts of this case, however, it would be appropriate to leave these questions to the arbitral tribunal. 3. In the circumstances, the application is allowed. However, the reference shall be in accordance with clause 64 of the General Conditions of Contract. Parties shall proceed accordingly, including that the General Manager, Western Railway shall appoint the arbitral tribunal within eight weeks from today. 3 ARBAP89.07 4. The Arbitration Application is, accordingly, disposed of.