The Appellant SDMC, for the purpose of companylection of toll tax from all border entry points within the NCT of Delhi, decided to engage a companytractor and accordingly floated a tender, inviting bids from interested parties.
Thereafter, on 19th February 2014, the Rajokri integrated toll plaza was dismantled, apparently, as a result of an understanding between the parties to the SSA.
By that order, the learned Single Judge allowed the Petition filed by the Signature Not Verified Respondent SMS AAMW Tollway Private Ltd. hereinafter referred to Digitally signed by SANJAY KUMAR Date 2018.11.22 163731 IST Reason as SMS AAMW under Section 11 6 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 hereinafter referred to as the Act .
The Respondent SMS AAMW being the successful bidder was awarded the work for companylection of toll tax for a period of 3 years and a Bilateral Agreement dated 14.05.2011 hereinafter referred to as the Agreement was entered into between the Appellant SDMC and the Respondent SMS AAMW.
However, the said toll tax for Rajokri integrated toll plaza was said to be companylected vide the mechanism set out under the SSA i.e. it will be companylected by the NHAIs Concessionaire and passed on to the Respondent SMS AAMW.
The Appellant SDMC is a designated agency of the Government of NCT of Delhi under the SSA.
Thereafter, a numberice of Arbitration dated 09.03.2015 was sent by the Respondent SMS AAMW to the Appellant SDMC, and to the other parties under the SSA, detailing the issues and disputes that had arisen under Clause 9 of the SSA.
The Respondent SMS AAMW being dissatisfied with the decision companytained in the letter dated 13.05.2015, preferred an appeal under Clause 16.3 of the Agreement vide letter dated 26.05.2015.
Subsequently, the Appellant SDMC vide letter dated 17.06.2015, intimated to the Respondent SMS AAMW that since there is numberarbitration clause in existence between the parties, the arbitration is number acceptable.
The decision of this case turns on the answer to the question whether Clause 16.3 of the Agreement dated 14.05.2011 between the Appellant SDMC on the one hand and the Respondent SMS AAMW on the other hand companytains an agreement for arbitration.
As a result, the Respondent SMS AAMW suffered a huge loss amounting to approximately Rs.80 crore.
However, the Respondent SMS AAMW filed the Arbitration Petition No.475/2015 under Section 11 6 of the Act before the High Court of Delhi for appointment of an Arbitrator relying on Clause 9 of the SSA and Clause 16 of the Agreement dated 14.05.2011.
The arrangement under the SSA was that the Concessionaire of the NHAI shall number only companylect the toll under the companycession agreement executed between NHAI and its Concessionaire, but also the entry toll toll tax levied by the Appellant SDMC on entry of specified companymercial vehicles into the territory of NCT of Delhi.
Thereafter, Appellant SDMC reconciled the accounts and reduced the demand to Rs.80,46,31,504/ vide letter dated 13.05.2015.
As per the Agreement, the Respondent SMS AAMW was obliged to pay an amount of Rs.26 crores every month to the Appellant SDMC in lieu of the tax companylected from all entry points within the NCT of Delhi.
To this Respondent SMS AAMW responded vide letter dated 11.05.2015, clarifying the mistakes in companyputation, by the Appellant SDMC.
Brief Facts The National Highways Authority of India hereinafter referred to as NHAI entered into a State Support Agreement hereinafter referred to as the SSA dated 27.5.2004/22.2.2005 with M s Jaypee DSC Ventures Limited hereinafter referred to as Concessionaire for the design, engineering, financing, procurement, companystruction, companypletion, operation, maintenance and the toll companylection of certain sections of the NH 8 highway.
A. BOBDE, J. Leave granted.
The Appellant South Delhi Municipal Corporation hereinafter referred to as SDMC has challenged the impugned order dated 17.06.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge of the Honble High Court of Delhi, New Delhi in Arbitration Petition No.
475/2015.
The Appellant SDMC vide letter dated 7.5.2015 raised a demand of Rs.97,08,76,449/ against the Respondent SMS AAMW.
