Page No.# 1/3 GAHC040019832025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) (ITANAGAR BENCH) Case No. : Arb.P./7/2025 Roadway Solutions India Infra Ltd House No.20, near Kubex Soceity, Behind Bizzbay, Off NIBM Road, Kondhawa, Pune, Maharashtra 411048 represented by it Director Shri Navjeet Gadhoke, Son of Shri Harjinder Gadhoke, resident of 112 Clover Hills, NIBM Road, Kondhwa, Pune 411048, Maharashtra. VERSUS The Border Roads Organization represented by its HQ Chief Engineer (Project Arunak), C/o 99 APO, Damsite, Naharlagun, Papum Pare District, Arunachal Pradesh 791110 Advocate for the Petitioner : Duge Soki, Advocate for the Respondent : Marto Kato, DSGI BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN ORDER 23.03.2026 Heard Mr. D. Soki, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. M. Kato, learned Standing Counsel, DSGI, for the sole respondent. 2. This petition, under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; is preferred by the applicant, namely, Roadways Solution India Infra Ltd., for appointment of independent and impartial arbitrator, in terms of the Page No.# 2/3 contract agreement, dated 22.11.2022, which is annexed with the petition as ‘Annexure No. 1’, and as per the provision of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to adjudicate upon the dispute among the parties. 3. Mr. Soki, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner, M/s Roadway Solutions India Infra Limited was awarded the contract of worth Rs. 28,70,99,650/-, for Supply and Erection of Corrugated Steel Pipe Tunnel, as per detailed specification and project drawing for 60 m length at km 50.000, 170 m length at km 56.900, on road Taliha-Nacho, in Upper Subansiri district, under 77 RCC/23 BRTF and 140 m length at km 2.000, on road Hapoli-Sarli-Huri, under 119 RCC/756 BRTF, in Kurung Kumey district, Project Arunank of Arunachal Pradesh. 3.1 Mr. Soki, further submits that the petitioner had duly executed the contract awarded to him vide GeM Contract No. GEMC-511687727207118, dated 22.11.2022, and vide 80290/Supply HQ CE (P) Arunank Letter No. Cut&Cover/40/E8, dated 22.11.2022. However, some dispute arose regarding the work and as such, the petitioner had invoked the Dispute Resolution Board (DRB), which was decided in favour of the petitioner. But, the respondent has raised objections and as such, the petitioner invoked the clause of arbitration, vide letter, dated 25.09.2025, and sent arbitration notice on 28.10.2025, and also proposed names of arbitrator for mutual appointment of sole arbitrator, vide letter, dated 10.11.2025. However, the petitioner and the respondent have failed to arrive at a mutual agreement, in respect of the appointment of the sole arbitrator and as such, Mr. Soki has contended to appoint an arbitrator, from the panel of Arbitrators, which has been notified by the Registry, vide notification No. 10, dated 24.02.2026. Page No.# 3/3 4. Mr. Kato, learned Standing Counsel, DSGI, appearing for the sole respondent submits that he has no objection in the event of appointing an arbitrator from the Panel of Arbitrators that has been notified by the Registry of this Court. 5. Accordingly, taking note of the submission of the learned counsel for both the parties and also, considering the facts and circumstances on record, Sri Bani Kanta Das, Advocate and former Chief Engineer and Secretary to the Govt. of Assam, PWD, Assam; is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator. 6. In terms of above, this petition, under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; stands disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant