[2026:RJ-JP:32348] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Arbitration Application No. 48/2025 CNR: RJHC020287812025 | URN: ARBAP / 72U / 2025 M/s B. S. Constructions, a proprietorship concern of Shri Abhishek Kumar Singh, S/o Shri Bisheshwar Singh having its registered office at 2-A, LGF, Rishabh Tower, Community Center, Karkardooma East, Delhi 110092 ----Applicant Versus Union of India through Divisional Railway Manager (Engg.), North Western Railways, Jodhpur, Rajasthan ----Respondent/ Non-Claimant For Applicant(s) : Ms.Kritika Singh, Adv. for Mr.Shiven Gupta, Adv. For Respondent(s) : Mr.Parag Rastogi, Adv. HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA Order 14/08/2026 1. A dispute has arisen between the parties with respect to the agreement entered into amongst them, which reflects that both the parties had agreed to get their dispute resolved through an Arbitrator, who is to be appointed under the provisions of Arbitra- tion and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act of 1996’). For appointment of Arbitrator, the present application has come before this Court. 2. In the case of M/s Devender Singh Contractor Vs. Union of India: D.B. Civil Reference No.1/2024, this Court held as un- der: "It is not in dispute between the parties that there exist an ar- bitration clause. The arbitration clause is an independent clause which has to be read independently of the other clauses of the Arbitrator and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') and unless there is an embargo in the said arbitration clause merely because in some other clauses of the agreement, cer- tain parts are excluded would not create embargo for appoint- [2026:RJ-JP:32348] (2 of 2) [ARBAP-48/2025] ment of arbitrator. In, Interplay between Arbitration Agreements (2024) 6 SCC 1, the Supreme Court held that if the arbitration clause exist then the question of arbitrability of non-arbitrability will have to be examined by the concerned arbitrator who is to be appointed by the Court in terms of Sec- tion 11(6) of the Act. Leaving it open to the concerned arbitra- tor to exercise his powers in terms of Section 16 of the Act." 3. This Court has also decided the distinction of disputes at the level of agreement would not be valid condition, as once there is an arbitration clause, the kinds of disputes which may arise will have to be decided by the arbitrator alone. This Court deems it appropriate to appoint Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish Kumar Sharma, (Former Judge Rajasthan High Court), R/o 1- Rail Nagar East, Bhagwan Path, Nirwan Nagar Ke Pas Jaipur, to act as the Sole Arbitrator and to decide all issues without prejudice to the rights and contentions raised in the present application. 4. The arbitration fees shall be determined in accordance with the Fourth Schedule of the Act of 1996, as amended. The fee of the Arbitrator will be equally borne by both the parties. 5. The arbitration application is allowed accordingly. 6. Copy of this order be sent to the appointed Sole Arbitrator. (SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA), ACTING CJ 35/Himanshu Soni