M/S Bansal And Company v. Union Of India & ANR.

$~9 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ ARB.P. 773/2025 M/S BANSAL AND COMPANY .....Petitioner Through:

Appearance not given versus UNION OF INDIA & ANR.

.....Respondents Through:

Mr. Vikrant N Goyal, Mr. Rakshit Tyagi, Mr. Kunal Dixit, Mr. Prince Choudhary, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

% 20.08.2025 1.

This is a petition filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties arising out of the Supply Work Order dated 15.04.2019.

2.

The facts are that the petitioner is a company engaged in the business of construction and was awarded the contract for construction of High Security Weld Mesh Fence at Udaipur (1.48 Kms) and Mount Abu (3.1 Kms) by the respondent No. 2, which is a unit of respondent No. 1, through the Supply Work Order dated 15.04.2019.

3.

The "Standard conditions of Supply Order" of the said Supply Work Order contained an arbitration clause being clause No. 3 which reads as under: - "3. Arbitration. All disputes or differences arising out of or in connection with the Supply Order shall be settled by bilateral discussions. Any dispute, disagreement or question arising out of or relating to the Supply Order or relating to construction or performance, which cannot be settled amicably, may be resolved through arbitration. The standard clause of arbitration is as per The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

Forms DPM-7, DPM-8 and DPM-9 (Available in MoD website and can be provided on request)."

4.

Additionally, the Defence Procurement Manual-2009 of the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, contained an arbitration clause as Form DPM-7 as extracted below:- The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

5.

Since disputes arose between the parties, the petitioner invoked arbitration, vide legal notice dated 31.12.2021. 6.

Mr. Goyal, learned counsel for the respondents states that he has no objection to the appointment of an Arbitrator as long as all his legal rights and counter-claims are left open for adjudication before the learned Arbitrator.

7.

For the said reasons, the petition is allowed, with the following directions:

i) Mr.

Naveen Kumar Chaudhary, (Advocate) (Mob.

No.

9810372713) is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

ii) The arbitration will be held under the aegis and rules of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, Delhi High Court, Sher Shah Road, New Delhi (hereinafter, referred to as the 'DIAC'). iii) The remuneration of the learned Arbitrator shall be in terms of DIAC (Administrative Cost and Arbitrators' Fees) Rules, 2018. iv) The learned Arbitrator is requested to furnish a declaration in terms of Section 12 of the Act prior to entering into the reference. v) It is made clear that all the rights and contentions of the parties, including as to the arbitrability of any of the claim, any other preliminary objection, as well as claims/counter-claims and merits of the dispute of either of the parties, are left open for adjudication by the learned arbitrator.

vi) The parties shall approach the learned Arbitrator within two weeks from today.

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

8.

The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. JASMEET SINGH, J AUGUST 20, 2025/DM The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.