[2025:RJ-JP:19928] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No. 2349/2010 1. State Of Rajasthan through Collector, Sikar, Sikar Collectorate, Sikar, District Sikar. 2. Executive Engineer, Public Works Department, Division Fatehpur, District Sikar. 3. Chief Engineer and Secretary Empowered Standing Committee (Road First), Public Works Department, Jacob Road, Jaipur ----Appellants Versus M/s Laxmi Construction Company through Ramavtar Sharma, Prop. S/o Shri Madan Lal Sharma, PWD Contractopr, r/o Malkeda, District Sikar (Rajasthan) ----Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Dheeraj Tripathi with Mr. Abhishek Paliwal For Respondent(s) : Mr. Samyak with Mr. Sanjay Kumar Sharma on behalf of Mr. D. D. Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANEESH SHARMA Order 12/05/2025 1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellants assailing the order dated 12.07.2010 in Arbitration Case No.06/2009 (38/2008) passed by learned Additional District Judge No.1, Sikar, whereby the impugned award dated 09.05.2008 was set aside due to violation of the principles of natural justice. It was further directed that the matter may be re-decided after the formation of a new committee. 2. Learned counsel for the parties submit that, as per the decision of Hon'ble Division Bench in the case of M/s Eminent [2025:RJ-JP:19928] (2 of 3) [CMA-2349/2010] Colonizers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Rajasthan Housing Board & Ors.; D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.2435/2019 , decided on 20.02.2020, it was held that the present dispute is not maintainable before the committees. In view of Clauses-23 and 51 of the agreement, the jurisdiction to resolve the dispute, and adjudicate the issues raised by the claimant, fall within the domain of Competent Civil Court. 3. Further, during the course of hearing, learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that in view of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench in the case of M/s Eminent Colonizers Pvt. Ltd. (supra), the claim so raised by the respondent, is not entertainable before the committee constituted by the appellant. Therefore, the claimant-respondent may be allowed to withdraw its original claim, and the impugned order dated 12.07.2010, as well as award dated 09.05.2008 may be set aside and liberty may be granted to the claimant to file his claim before the Competent Civil Court in terms of Clause-51 of the agreement. 4. In view of the above understanding arrived at between the parties, this appeal is disposed of on the following terms: (i) That the impugned order dated 12.07.2010 is set aside (ii) The award dated 09.05.2008 is set aside. (iii) The claimant is permitted to withdraw its claim filed before the committee and submit the same by way of a civil suit before the Competent Court having jurisdiction over the place, where agreement is executed. 5. It is also made clear that in view of pendency of the claim, award, as well as this appeal, the claimant will be entitled to move an application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act for [2025:RJ-JP:19928] (3 of 3) [CMA-2349/2010] condonation of delay, with regard to time spent in pursuing these remedies. 6. This appeal stands disposed of only on the basis of understanding arrived at between the parties as indicated above. 7. Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of. (MANEESH SHARMA),J Seema/2 Whether Reportable : Yes/No