Arbitration No.114 of 2007 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Arbitration No.114 of 2007 Decided on : 06-02-2009 Ashok Kumar Aggarwal ....Petitioner VERSUS The Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary to Govt. Haryana, PWD B & R Branch, Chandigarh & others. ....Respondents CORAM:-HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA. 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ? -.- Present:- Mr. Sachin Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Ajay Gupta, Addl. A.G., Haryana. HEMANT GUPTA, J The petitioner has sought appointment of an Arbitrator in respect of a dispute raised between the parties arising out of contract granted to the petitioner with regard to repair work of Gehlab to Bhanguri Road Km 0 to 6.25 in Mewat District. In response to Notice Inviting Tender, the offer of the petitioner was accepted on 02.09.2005. It is the case of the petitioner that the work was completed as per the conditions of Notice Inviting Tender except the Arbitration No.114 of 2007 -2- work of premix carpet. It is pointed out that several heavily loaded trucks used to pass over the said road, thus, destroying the construction material. The petitioner requested for change of the routes of the trucks. Such request was not accepted. The Executive Engineer inspected the site and changed the specifications and reaches of the work and sent the same to the higher authorities for sanction. The request of the petitioner for extension of time to execute the work, was not granted, though the same was recommended by the Executive Engineer. It is pointed out that on account of delay in work, the prices of raw material increased. On these facts inter alia, the petitioner raised the dispute claiming a sum of Rs.17,77.036.24, besides interest at the rate of 18% p.a. from the date of amount became due till its actual payment On behalf of the respondents, it has been pointed out that the petitioner has not deposited the security amount as per Clause 25-A of the contract agreement before appointment of an Arbitrator and that in terms of the agreement, serving Superintending Engineer of Haryana P.W.D. B&R Branch or retired Chief Engineer are to be appointed as an Arbitrator by Engineer-in-Chief. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is ready and willing to deposit the security amount within one month of the amount of security being communicated by the respondents. In view of the said fact, the present application is disposed of directing the respondents to communicate the amount of security required to be deposited within one month. The petitioner shall deposit the security amount within one month from the date of receipt of the said Arbitration No.114 of 2007 -3- communication. The Engineer-in-Chief shall thereafter, appoint an Arbitrator in terms of Clause 25-A of the agreement between the parties. With the said direction, the present petition stands disposed of. (Hemant Gupta) Judge 6th February, 2009. monika