IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO.18 OF 2009 M/s. S.K. Banerjee ... Applicant Versus The Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation and others. ... Respondents Mr.Aviraj S. Tarar for the applicant. CORAM : J.N. PATEL, ACTING C.J. DATED : 22ND JANUARY, 2010 P.C. Heard. 2. The applicant has filed this application seeking appointment of Arbitrator. It is the case of the applicant that he had entered into the contract with the respondent-MIDC for construction of major bridge across the river Indrayani and railway over bridge at Talegaon, MIDC Industrial Area, Pune vide contract agreement bearing No.C-2 of 2002-03. Clause 9 of the agreement consisting of special contract conditions provides that in case of disputes arising between the contractor and MIDC, the matter may be referred to the Chief Engineer, MIDC and his decision shall be final and binding on the Contractor. It is the case of the applicant that despite of giving notice to the respondent- Chief Engineer, the Chief Engineer has failed to adjudicate the dispute and, therefore, this court should appoint an Arbitrator. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the Chief Engineer has not been able to proceed with the adjudication of the dispute as the party has filed his application under section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the Chief Justice and, therefore, as the matter is subjudice, no steps could be taken by the Arbitrator nominated under the agreement. It is further submitted that notice dated 19.8.2008 sent by the applicant through his advocate to consider and adjudicate the claims of the applicant. Therefore, application is prematured. 5. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the Chief Engineer has not given any intimation to the applicant within 30 days upon receipt of the notice and, therefore, the applicant was required to file this application. As the respondents have failed to adjudicate the dispute, therefore, an Arbitrator be appointed. 6. Accepting the contention of the leaned counsel appearing for the respondents that the Chief Engineer of the respondents could not adjudicate the dispute as the applicant has filed the application before the Chief Justice under section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, this application can be disposed of with a direction to the Chief Engineer, MIDC, to whom the dispute has been referred by the applicant, to adjudicate the dispute as expeditiously as possible within six months subject to cooperation of the applicant. Application stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs. ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE