SL. No Date Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures COURT’S OR JUDGES’S ORDERS 09.07.2025 ARBAP No. 24 of 2024 Hon'ble G. Narendar, C.J. Mr. Modassir H. Khan, learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr. Rajesh Sharma, learned Standing Counsel for the Union of India. Correction Application (MCC No.03 of 2025) 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 4. This application (MCC No.03 of 2025) is preferred to correct the erroneous recording of fact in Paragraph No.4. 5. This Court, after hearing learned counsels and recording the submissions of learned counsels, had recorded in Paragraph No.4 as under:- “4. It is fairly admitted by the respondents counsel that the final bill has neither been accepted, nor has it been rejected. By notice dated 21.01.2023, the applicant invoked Condition-70 of the GCC and sought for reference of disputed for determination by arbitration. Despite the same, the respondents have failed to appoint an arbitrator.” 6. It is now submitted that the final bill was accepted and only the undisputed amount was paid, and this is reflected by Annexure-21. 7. On perusal of the same, it is seen that the payment made by the respondents has not been accepted as a final settlement. 8. In that view, the submission of learned counsels is placed on record. 9. The first sentence of Paragraph No.4, i.e. “it is fairly admitted by the respondents’ counsel that the final bill has neither been accepted, nor has it been rejected”, is modified and is directed to be recorded as “it is fairly submitted by the respondents’ that undisputed part of the final bill has been accepted and the proportionate amount has been paid and that the invocation of arbitration clause is in respect of the disputed amount”. 10. Consequently, the recording of the second sentence in Paragraph No.6, i.e. “the dates, narrated above, clearly indicate that there is no rejection of the final bill and in absence of the rejection of the final bill, the question that arises is whether limitation starts running?”, is modified and is directed to be recorded as “the dates, narrated above, clearly indicate that there is a rejection to the extent of the disputed claim and the rejection having been post the notice invoking arbitration clause, whether payments have any impact under the Limitation Act, is required to be gone into by the Arbitrator.” 11. The office to carry out the said corrections and issue a certified copy of this order. 12. The Correction Application stands disposed of. (G. Narendar, C.J.) 09.07.2025 NISHANT