1 2025:HHC:15739 I N THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA . Arb. Case No. 885 of 20 24 Decided on: 23.05.2025 K.K Mahajan Constructions ......Petitioner Versus The State of H.P. & Ors. ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Suneet Goel, Senior Advocate with Mr. Vishvas Kaushal, Advocate. For the respondents: Ms. Priyanka Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral) Appointment of Arbitrator is sought under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by the petitioner, on account of the work contract of Span Bridge over Baner Khad on Daulatpur Jalari Khari Road at RD 5/740. 2. The case as such is that approved drawings had been handed over to the petitioner in July 2020 which is after the stipulated date of the contract and during the course of construction, there was a collapse of Arch due to which 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 litigation ensued and an order dated 04.08.2023 was passed blacklisting the petitioner which is stated to be the subject matter of separate challenge in CWP No.11535 of 2024. 3. The notice dated 05.09.2024 was sent invoking the arbitration Clause 65 of the agreement as per the letter of award dated 20.09.2018 and in such circumstances appointment of Arbitrator is sought. 4. The reply as such of the State is that the award was for Rs.3,42,07,077/- and eighteen months time was prescribed to complete the work. The general arrangement drawing was tentatively approved by Respondent No. 2, and reference has been made to various interim bills and the correction of drawings. However, during the course of construction, the arch of the bridge collapsed in the afternoon on 10.04.2023. Reference has also been made to various management meetings called and withholding of payments etc. and the cancellation of work which was accorded/approved vide letter dated 10.09.2024. 3 5. In such circumstances, it is apparent that the dispute as such has arisen inter se the parties to the award therefore, it will be appropriate to relegate the parties to the remedy of appointment of arbitrator as agreed, as per the terms of the agreement. 6. Accordingly, the application is allowed and Mr. Satish Sagar, Chief Engineer (Emeritus), HPPWD, resident of Sagar Cottage, Village Phayal, P.O. Dhari, Tehsil & District Shimla-171219, is appointed as an Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties, since the matter is technical in nature and it would be appropriate for an Engineer to go into this aspect. His appointment as an Arbitrator shall come into force only after his disclosure in writing is obtained in terms of Section 11(8) of the Act and only after receipt thereof, his appointment, as an Arbitrator, shall come into force. 7. On his giving consent to arbitrate the dispute between the parties as an Arbitrator, Mr. Satish Sagar, Chief Engineer, shall enter into reference, and shall pass an award in accordance with law. 4 8. Copy of this order be furnished to the learned counsel for the parties and also be furnished to the learned Arbitrator. The learned Arbitrator so appointed shall be entitled to fee as per stipulation contained in 4th Schedule appended to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. May 23 , 2025 ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) (ankit) Chief Justice