By the impugned order, the High Court allowed application under S. 11 6 of the Act, and appointed one Sri.
The relevant facts leading to the filing of these appeals as emerging from the records may be briefly stated as follows The parties herein entered into a companytract pursuant to distinct numberices inviting tender by BSNL in short the appellant for the work of companystruction of 4 Nos.
Gurbaux Singh who was appointed by Chief Engineer Civil BSNL of appellant No.1.
The Appellants having failed to respond to the letters of respondent requiring them to appoint an arbitrator and to appoint an arbitrator in response to such letters within the stipulated period in accordance with Clause 25 of the respective Agreements, the respondent was companystrained to file petitions under Section 11 6 of the Act for appointment of an Arbitrator.
Type III and 1 No.
11, 12, 17, 18 and 28 of 2005 passed by the High Court of Orissa whereby the High Court had appointed Sh.
69 41 05 CE c BBSR/205.
Bibhudhendra Mishra in place of departmental numberinee Sri.
of Type II and 4 K type T.E. building at Jankia and of vertical extension to 8 Nos.
The said companytract companytained an arbitration clause in terms whereof the Chief Engineer, Telecommunication Postal Department in charge of the work at the time of dispute, or if there be numberChief Engineer, the Administrative Head of the said Telecommunication Postal Department was to be appointed as a sole arbitrator.
However, according to the case made out by the appellants, on 9th of March, 2005, Chief Engineer Civil , BSNL had already appointed Sri.
The Respondent by letters, requested the Chief Engineer Civil for appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties in terms of clause 25 of the respective agreements.
of Type III, 3 Nos.
The said provision envisaged that in terms thereof numberperson other than the one appointed by such Chief Engineer or Administrative Head of the Telecommunication/ Postal as aforesaid should act as arbitrator to decide the disputes referred to him.
of Type II and 6 Nos.
of Type IV Staff Quarters at Bhanjanagar of vertical extension to companybined building at Aska of 3 Nos.
of Type II, 2 Nos.
TARUN CHATTERJEE, J. Leave granted.
Feeling aggrieved by the said order of the High Court, the appellant has filed these special leave petitions which on grant of leave, were heard in the presence of learned companynsel for the parties.
These appeals by special leave have been filed against the orders dated 5th of January 2005 in R.B.P. Nos.
of Type IV staff quarters at CTTC companypound Vanivihar, Bhubaneshwar.
Since the parties and the subject matter of the dispute are the same, we have clubbed all these appeals and the same are being decided analogously by this companymon judgment to avoid any companyfusion.
