THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.5 of 2011 ORDER: This application has been filed by M/s. Architectural Aluminium Systems represented by its Proprietor Mr. Anand Kapadia under Section 11 (5) & (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for resolution of the disputes in respect of work order dated 28.03.2008. The applicant is a Proprietary Concern undertaking Aluminium integration works including Aluminium Cladding works. The respondent awarded the contract for supply and installation of Glazing and ACP works at incubation center at Bachupally, Hyderabad. The work order/contract came to be issued to the applicant on 13.03.2008 for supply and installation of Glazing and ACP works at incubation center at Bachupally, Hyderabad. The value of the work order/contract initially was Rs.48,80,160/-. The mode of payment of the amount has been indicated in paragraph 4 of the application. The applicant completed the work as per the work order. Even though the value of the work was estimated at Rs.48,80,160/-, the same was enhanced to Rs.52,15,945/-. The respondent paid Rs.30,04,833/- leaving a balance of Rs.20,60,472/- as per the statement of account dated 18.05.2009. Several times the applicant demanded the respondent for payment of amount including release of retention money vide letters dated 08.01.2009, 16.02.2009 and 28.05.2009, but the respondent failed to comply the demand of the applicant. The work order contains an arbitration clause. Therefore, the applicant has invoked the arbitration clause in the work order and issued notice dated 04.01.2011 proposing the name of the Arbitrator to resolve the disputes arising out of the work order/contract. The respondent, having received the notice, failed to consent for the Arbitrator proposed by the applicant. Hence, this application. Notice to the respondent came to be ordered on 11.02.2011. The applicant moved an application seeking permission of the Court to take out notice to the respondent by way of publication and the said application came to be ordered on 25.04.2011 permitting the applicant to take out notice by way of publication in “Deccan Chronicle”, English Daily Newspaper, Hyderabad Edition. The applicant took out the publication and filed copy of the same as proof. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and perused the material placed on record. It is contended by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant that the applicant carried out the work as per the work order, and as per the work order, the applicant has to get balance amount of Rs.19,45,692/- together with interest. A further submission has been made that the applicant invoked the arbitration clause in work order and issued notice dated 04.01.2011 proposing the name of the Arbitrator for resolution of disputes. But the respondent has not issued any reply consenting for the name proposed by the applicant as Arbitrator. I have gone through the notice dated 04.01.2011. A perusal of the said notice discloses that the applicant has detailed the work carried out by it under the work order and the amount due to it. As per the work order, the disputes between the parties are required to be settled by arbitration. For better appreciation, I may refer the relevant clause in the work order, which reads as hereunder: “All disputes and/or difference arising between the parties out of this Contract shall be settled by Arbitration under and in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The reference shall be heard by one arbitrator, appointed by mutual consent the award made and published in pursuance of such Arbitration proceedings shall be final and binding on both the parties. The proceedings of the Arbitration shall be held in English language and shall be held at Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh. Pending resolution of any dispute pursuant to Arbitration, under all circumstances the Contractor shall continue to execute the Works as prescribed in this Contract.” In view of the above referred clause, I find that the applicant has made out valid ground for appointment of an Arbitrator for resolution of the disputes. Accordingly, the application is ordered appointing Sri A.R.Sampath Kumar, Retired District Judge, C/o. A.Ravi Kumar, 24, Subramanyanagar Colony, Hyderabad – 59, as Arbitrator for resolution of disputes between the parties that have arisen in respect of work order dated 13.03.2008. _______________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY,J 15.06.2011 v v