1 2026:HHC:5308 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Arb. Case No. 27 of 2025 Decided on: 27.02.2026 M/s. Himachal Concrete Corporation ..Petitioner Versus Chairman-cum-M.D, HPSEBL & ors. ..Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner: Mr. Vijay Chaudhary, Advocate. For the respondents: Mr. Saurabh Chand, Advocate vice Ms. Vandana Misra, Advocate. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral) The present petition has been filed for appointment of the Arbitrator under Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by the petitioner. 2. Keeping in view the arbitration clause 10 contained in arbitration agreement dated 21.03.2005 and as per clause 8.1 of purchase order dated 04.01.2007, the petition has been contested on the ground that the petitioner has failed to adhere to the timeline and in view of the failure of the petitioner to complete the work, the issue of limitation has been sought to be raised for the enforcement of a 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:5308 claim. It is also admitted that there were civil proceedings inter-se the parties. 3. The proceedings would go on to show that initially the petitioner was successful in getting the judgment in his favour to discharge and release the bank guarantee. Against the judgment/decree dated 20.10.2021 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Court No.1, Sunder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P, in Civil Suit No.345-1/2013, appeal had been filed by the respondent–Board before the learned Additional District Judge, Sundar Nagar, District Mandi, H.P, which was allowed on 22.12.2023 by setting aside the same on the ground that an arbitration clause existed. Thereafter, Regular Second Appeal bearing No. 55 of 2024 was filed, which was dismissed as withdrawn on 24.06.2024 (Annexure P-7) with liberty to pursue the arbitration remedy. Thereafter, the requisite notice, as such, invoking the arbitration clause was served (Annexure P-8). 4. In reply to the notice (Annexure P/9), the Board on 15.10.2024 had taken a plea that the legal notice is time barred and, therefore, the matter would not be liable to be referred to arbitration. Resultantly the filing of the present petition immediately thereafter on 13.01.2025 was done. 5. In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that dispute is still surviving and respondents having successfully taken the plea that the matter would be referred to arbitration and argument that the legal notice has become time barred 3 2026:HHC:5308 and limitation aspect has been dealt with by a Three Judge Bench of the Apex Court in case titled as Islam Ismail Khan Deshmukh Vs Asap Fluids Private Limited and another, Arbitration Petition No.20 of 2019 with Arbitration Petition No.22 of 2019 decided on 7.11.2024 holding that the moment, notice is served and there is no response to the same within 30 days, the limitation period is to be counted as three years from there. In such circumstances, the arbitrator is liable to be appointed accordingly, after having served the notice, the same being not responded to within 30 days, limitation would be three years after the expiry of said period. 6. Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Girish Agnihotri, Ex. Judge, Punjab & Haryana High Court (Mob. No.70092-60001 & 73474-00001), is appointed as an Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties, 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, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Girish Agnihotri, Ex. Judge Punjab & Haryana High Court shall enter into reference, and shall pass an award in accordance with law. 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 4 2026:HHC:5308 stipulation contained in 4th Schedule appended to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 9. Accordingly, the application is disposed of alongwith pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. February 27, 2026 ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) (mamta) Chief Justice