Madhukar Mittal Govt. Contractor v. Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board And ANR.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

Arbitration Case No.216 of 2014 (O&M) DATE OF DECISION: 15.05.2015 Madhukar Mittal ..... Applicant versus Haryana State Agricultural Marketing Board, etc. .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.J. VAZIFDAR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Present: Mr. P.S. Rana, Advocate for the applicant Mr. Vishal Garg, Advocate for the respondents ..

S.J. VAZIFDAR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE: (Oral) This is an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

2.

The arbitration agreement is admitted. In fact, the disputes were referred to an officer appointed by the Chief Administrator of the Board as per the arbitration clause on 12.06.2008.

The proceedings concluded on 23.02.2010.

Unfortunately, no award was made. I am informed that a new Arbitrator has now been appointed on 09.02.2015. 3.

The respondents shall impress upon the Arbitrator to make the award as expeditiously as possible. The parties agree not to seek any adjournment before the Arbitrator. Even if the Arbitrator ceases to be in office, it would make no difference as the arbitration clause does not require the Arbitrator to be in service.

4.

The application is accordingly disposed of.

15.05.2015 (S.J. VAZIFDAR) parkash* ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE PARKASH CHAND 2015.05.15 18:14 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document