( 2025:HHC:26993 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Arb. Case no. 429 of 2024 Decided on: 08.08.2025 ____________________________________________________ Jagdish Chand Gupta ....Petitioner Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and another ...Respondents _____________________________________________________ Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioner: Mr. Sumeet Raj Sharma, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr.Arsh Rattan, Deputy Advocate General. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral) This application has been filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short “the Act’) for appointment of Arbitrator. 2. The agreement as such bearing No.56 was entered into between the parties for construction of ‘Pre-stressed Box Cantilever Bridge (71.00 mtrs. Clear span) over Binwa Khad on Balh Bajuri (Dandhole) to Jamthala Lad Bharol road inkm.10/495 (Under NABARD RIDF-XV)’. 3. The work was awarded on 21.06.2016 for an 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? - 2 - amount of Rs.6,25,00,000/- and had to be completed within two years. Under Clause 65 of the agreement, all disputes were to be referred to the sole arbitrator. 4. It has been pleaded that the drawings as such were given and the machinery had been rendered idle due to non- availability of the approach road. The length of bridge had been increased from 71.00 mtrs to 95.00 meters and a demand had been raised for payment of additional length of the bridge alongwith release of escalation refund of difference between VAT and GST and also compensation for prolongation and loss of profitability. 5. Necessary notice dated 21.12.2023 (Annexure P-3) had been served upon the respondents, which has not been responded to by the respondents, leading to filing of the present petition. 6. The stand of the respondents-State as such is to the extent that the penalty for the delay as imposed was waived off by the Superintending Engineer, 5th Circle, HPPWD on 10.03.2021. Allegations regarding change of specification and increase in length of bridge are contested and stated to be not based on the fact being lump-sum contract. The claim of extra - 3 - payment was refuted as such on the ground that the Department had submitted the drawings of upper part of the abutment, which is related to bear the cantilever span of the bridge, which transfers the load of the bridge span over to the abutment. 7. It is also to be noticed that the drawings were issued part wise to the contractor at different periods of time as per requirement as per meeting on 02.02.2021. 8. Supplementary affidavit has also been filed by the State and the stand is the same that the drawings were issued part wise to the contractor at different periods of time as per requirement. It has been stated that the reply to notice given by the petitioner has not been placed on record and a reference was made to communication dated 04.03.2024 (Annexure R-2) to point out the defence in sum and substance and also that the contents of Clause 25 of the contract agreement does not contain the arbitration clause. 9. A perusal of the agreement would go on to show that the Clause of arbitration as such is under Clause 65 and therefore the defence as such of the State is baseless and once the parties is agreed as per contract to refer the matter to - 4 - arbitration, this Court is of the considered opinion that having agreed as such to the mode of settlement of dispute they are bound as such by the terms of the contract. 10. Keeping in view the above position, I am of the considered opinion that the matter can only be resolved by appointment of an Arbitrator. Accordingly, the application is allowed and Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.S Walia, former Judge Punjab and Haryana High Court R/o House No.1143, Sector 8C, Chandigarh (Telephone No.98140-06691) (email: justicebswalia@gmail.com) is appointed as an Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties, 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. 11. On his giving consent to arbitrate the dispute between the parties as an Arbitrator, Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.S Walia, former Judge, Punjab and Haryana High Court, shall enter into reference, and shall pass an award in accordance with law. 12. Copy of this order be furnished to the learned counsel for the parties and also be furnished to the learned - 5 - 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. 13. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly. ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) Chief Justice 8th August, 2025 (priti)