Arbitration Case No.75 of 2011 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Arbitration Case No.75 of 2011 Date of Decision:- 03.11.2011 V.S.D.A. Builders …..Petitioner Versus M/s Surya Pharmaceuticals Ltd. …..Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA Present: Mr. Shiv Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak Goyal, Advocate for the respondent *** Hemant Gupta, J. (Oral) The petitioner has sought appointment of an Arbitrator in respect of the disputes arising out of an agreement dated 14.12.2009. Vide the aforesaid agreement, the respondent-company placed a Work order of Civil Construction of Module I – Ozonization Plant Building and RM Store – Menthol Plant. As per the petitioner, he has almost completed the work, but now at the instance of Deputy General Manager of the respondent-company, the work at the site was stopped and certain Tools & Plants (T&P) material is lying at the site, which is to be removed. But the respondent did not permit the petitioner to do so. The petitioner made a request for payment of the bills vide letter dated 13.05.2010 and also sought appointment of an Arbitrator vide communication dated 09.06.2010. But neither the payment was made nor an Arbitrator appointed, therefore, the petitioner invoked the jurisdiction of this Court for appointment of an Arbitrator. 1 Arbitration Case No.75 of 2011 In reply, the respondent has not disputed that certain disputes have arisen between the parties. It is alleged that quality of work carried out by the petitioner is bad for which technical assessment is required. The respondent has proposed the name of Mr.Sunil Mahajan, an Architect, who is registered with Council of Architecture. The Learned counsel for the Petitioner is not agreeable to such name. Since disputes have arisen between the parties and such disputes are of technical nature in relation to the construction activities, therefore, Ms. Sucheta Luthra, Sandeep Sucheta Luthra and Associates, 2004, Sector 15-C, Chandigarh is appointed as an Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties. The Arbitrator shall be paid Rs.60,000/- to be shared initially equally by the parties subject to the costs of the proceedings in terms of the Award. The petitioner has also sought the permission of the Court to lift the Tools and Plants lying on the site. In reply to such an application, the respondent has stated that the petitioner is at liberty to visit the premises of the answering respondent to verify about these goods and can take back after showing his ownership and identification of the goods in the presence of the respectable of both the parties. In view of the said fact, the petitioner is permitted to lift the goods, if any, lying at the site of the respondent on showing its ownership and identification of the goods in the presence of the representatives of the parties. Disposed of accordingly. (HEMANT GUPTA) JUDGE 03.11.2011 sonika 2