Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3717 (GAU)

M/S RUPA ENTERPRISE v. UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS.

Arb.P./44/2025 · 2026-07-30

Soumitra Saikia

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Page No.# 1/2 GAHC010235642025 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Arb.P./44/2025 M/S RUPA ENTERPRISE KACHALUKHUWA, OPP. HOUSING COLONY , NAGAON, ASSAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER HRIDAY BORAH HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT NAGAON, KACHALUKHUWA, DIST- NAGAON, ASSAM VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS. THROUGH THE GENERAL MANAGER, CONSTRUCTION, N.F RAILWAY, MALIGAON, GUWAHATI-781011, ASSAM 2:DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER/CONSTRUCTION/COORDINATION N.F. RAILWAY DIBRUGARH 3:XEN/CON-6/DBRT N.F. RAILWAY RKB PATH DIBRUGARH TOWN DIBRUGARH ASSAM 4:SSE(W)/CON/DBRT OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER/CON/CO-ORDINATION N.F. RAILWAY DIBRUGARH ASSA Advocate for the Petitioner : MR B SARMAH, K GURUNG,MR G PATHAK Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. R K D CHOUDHURY Page No.# 2/2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA ORDER 31.07 .2026 It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the item wise details have been furnished by the petitioner. However, the respondents having being accepted have not given the list of arbitrators in respect of their appointment. It is only upon the list being furnished, the petitioner will decide whether he would like to concur on any of the arbitrators from the curated penal maintained by the respondents or he would not like to choose and waive his right for appointment of arbitrator from the curated penal maintained by the respondent. 2] In that view of the matter, since the petitioner expresses a possibility for appointment of an arbitrator from the curated penal maintained by the respondent department, at this stage the claims of the petitioner by way of this arbitration petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 for appointment of an arbitrator is prematured and accordingly, the same stands dismissed giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Court at the relevant point in time, if so advised. 3] Mr. R.K. Dev Choudhury, learned Senior Counsel & DySGI appears for the respondents. JUDGE Comparing Assistant