M/S SOOD ASSOCIATES PVT LTD THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR MR NITIN SOOD v. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE CHIEF ENGINEER
A.APPL/18/2023 · 2026-02-04
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 8527 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 8527 (JHR) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:3000
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Arb. Application No. 18 of 2023 M/s. Sood Associates Pvt. Ltd. through its Director Mr. Nitin Sood, R/o. K-99, (LGF), P.O. & P.S.- Kalkaji, Dist.- Delhi (New Delhi) ... Petitioner
Versus
1. Union of India, through the Chief Engineer, Military Engineer Services, Ridge Road Jabalpur Cantt, P.O. & P.S.- Jabalpur Cantt., Dist.- Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh-482001. 2. The Engineer-in-Chief, Engineer-in-Chief’s Branch, Integrated HQ of Ministry of Defense (Army), Kashmir House, Rajaji Marg, P.O. & P.S.- Delhi, Dist.- Delhi, New Delhi-110011. 3. Garrison Engineer, Military Engineer Services, 7th Club Rd., near Sujata Chowk, Gungutoli, Kanke, P.O.- G.P.O. Ranchi, P.S.- Gonda, Dist.- Ranchi, Jharkhand, 834001 ... Respondents
--------- CORAM:
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
--------- For the Petitioner: Mr. Ashish Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Prashant Pallav, A.S.G.I.
--------- 09/Dated: 04.02.2026
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By order dated 17.01.2025, Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh, retired Principal District Judge, was appointed as Sole Arbitrator to arbitrate the dispute between the parties. 3. Mr. Sunil Kumar Singh has now written to this Court that he would not be able to continue with the arbitration proceedings because he has been appointed as a Judicial Member, GSTAT. 4. Learned counsels for the parties agree that the vacancy, that is now caused, will have to be supplied by this Court. They further agree to the appointment of Mr. Pratyush Shounikya, an Advocate of this Court, to arbitrate the dispute between the parties. Neutral Citation No. 2026:JHHC:3000
5. Mr. Pratyush Shounikya is present in the Court and he agrees to his appointment as Arbitrator. He further states that presently he does not have any arbitration. Further, Mr. Shounikya states that none of the disqualifications referred to in the Seventh Schedule apply or disable him from being appointed as an Arbitrator in this matter. 6. Accordingly, Mr. Pratyush Shounikya, an Advocate of this Court, who is presently residing at C/o Dilip Kumar Lal, Road No. 1, Swarnrekha Nagar, Ketari Bagan, Lower Chutia, Ranchi (Mob- 7909052217/8804642829, Email: advpratyushounikya@gmail.com) is appointed as an Arbitrator to arbitrate on the dispute between the parties in accordance with the Fourth Schedule to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 7.
Learned Arbitrator would endeavor to conclude the proceedings expeditiously by taking into regard the mandate of the Legislature under Section 29-A of the Act of 1996. 8. The Arbitration application is disposed of in the above terms. 9. The Registry is directed to intimate the Arbitrator so appointed with a request to take up the arbitration proceedings and shall also provide photocopies of the entire pleadings along with copies of the entire order-sheets to the learned Arbitrator. (M. S. Sonak, C.J.) February 04, 2026 N.A.F.R. Manoj/Rahul/Cp.2 Uploaded on 05.02.2026