Sr. No. 05 HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case: Arb P No. 10/2025 Date of Pronouncement : 14.11.2025 Uploaded on: 18.11.2025 M/s Raj Constructions. …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through: Mr. Dheeraj Sharma, Advocate. V/s Union of India and anr. …. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Vishal Sharma, DSGI. CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE ORDER 14.11.2025 (ORAL) 01. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (for short 8the Act9) seeking appointment of an independent Arbitrator., executed between the petitioner and the respondents. 02. The petitioner, a partnership firm, was awarded the Contract CA No. CEAFU-74/2015-16 amended as CA No. CEAFU-01/2017-18 Provision of Single living ACCN for DSC & NC (E) Personal At AF Station Jammu, by the Chief Engineer, Accepting Officer, vide Letter of Award dated 13.04.2017 for total consideration of ₹4,57,03,434.92/-. And, work order for Phase –I and Phase –II was issued vide No. 8100/CEAFU-01/17-18/14/E8 dated 21st April 2017 mentioning the terms and conditions for Phase-I and Phase –II as under: Phase-I Time Effect (For Phase-I) Fourteen months(14) a) Date of handing over the site 30th April 2017 b) Date of commencement of work 1st May 2017 c) Date of completion 30th June 2018 Phase-II Time Effect (For Phase-II) Twelve months(14) a) Date of handing over the site 31st October 2017 b) Date of commencement of work 1st November 2017 c) Date of completion 31st October 2018 However, vide letter No. 8100/CEAFU-01/17-18/217/E8 dated 3rd December 2018 the work order for said Phases was amended. 03. The petitioner undertook the contract work but the work could not be completed and the extension of time for completion of the work was granted vide letter No. 8100/CEAFU-01/17-18/553/E8 dated 16th December 2022. The petitioner completed the contract work on 30th October 2022 in respect whereof work completion letter was issued vide letter No. 8100/CEAFU-01/17-18/542/E8 dated 4th November 2022. 04. The disputes are alleged to have arisen between the parties regarding payment delays. It is asserted that petitioner approached the respondent– Department vide communications dated 01.08.2023, 20.09.2023, 27.02.2024 and 25.10.2023 requesting for release of the final bill payment as also the star rate approval. In addition, the petitioner vide letter dated 16.10.2023 also intimated the respondent about the bill payment under different Headings. However, the respondents failed to act upon the same. And, out of the final bill raised for an amount of ₹ 2,00,00,000/-, payment of an amount of ₹ 5,30,587.00 was made to the petitioner after making certain deductions which were not agreed to by the petitioner. The petitioner, thereafter, vide letters dated 01.10.2024 and 03.10.2024 requested for an appointment of an arbitrator for resolving the disputes arisen between the parties in terms of Condition No. 70 of the General Conditions of Contract (IAWF 2249-1989) . However, despite notice, the respondents failed to nominate their Arbitrator or respond. Owing to the rejection of the requests, the petitioner has been constrained to approach this Court in terms of Section 11(6) of the Act. Hence, the petition at hand. 05. Pursuant to the notice issued by the Court, the respondents had caused appearance and filed their response. 06. In brief what is sought to be urged is that the site for subject contract was handed over the petitioner on 9th November 2017 for Phase –I and 24th February 2018 for Phase-II and the subject work was required to be completed within eighteen months from the date of commencement of work. During the execution of the work numerous slow progress notices were issued to the petitioner. With regard to the distribution of the transformer it was informed to the petitioner that no plus DO was admissible on account of distribution transformer and same was conveyed to the petitioner vide HQ CE (AF) Udhampur Zone Letter dated 23rd October and 20th November 2023. Notwithstanding the above, the petitioner also not completed the work within period of completion as per the CA. It is stated that the petitioner raised claims under various headings, i.e., Labour Escalation due to official increase in wages, escalation due to cost increase of materials, prolongation of work due to extended completion, etc were reviewed and rejected by the respondents as the same were not found to be in conformity with the terms and conditions of the Contract Agreement. It is submitted that the averments with regard to request for appointment of arbitrator in terms of Clause 70 of the GCC (IAFW-2249) are not correctly stated. However, it is submitted that in case the Court deem it appropriate to appoint an arbitrator, the same may be appointed from the panel of approved independent arbitrators provided in communication dated February 7, 2022 (Annexure-V). 07. The existence of the arbitration clause, as aforesaid, and its invocation by the petitioner vide notice dated 03.10.2024, is not disputed. 07. Thus, in the given circumstances, learned counsel for the respondents, as always, fairly submits that let an arbitrator be appointed. But, since the claim that is sought to be made by the petitioner is vehemently disputed/ denied, it is submitted that respondent be granted liberty to raise all possible pleas/ objections before the arbitral tribunal/ arbitrator in this regard. 08. Accordingly, in the wake of the position sketched out above and in terms of the statements made by the learned counsel for the parties, the petition is allowed. And, with consent of learned counsel for the parties, Mr. Satish Chander, Additional Director (Retd) MES R/o Lane No. 4, Greater Kailash Jammu is appointed as the sole arbitrator. Who shall proceed with the matter in accordance with the provisions of the Act. And to make an award within the time provided in the Act itself after charging the prescribed fee along with incidental expenses to be shared by the parties. The respondents are at liberty to raise all the objections as regards the subject matter before the learned Arbitrator. 09. Registry to send a copy of this order to the learned arbitrator. (ARUN PALLI) CHIEF JUSTICE Jammu 14.11.2025 Sunita/Secy. SUNITA KOUL 2025.11.18 14:50 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document