Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by MADHU BALA Brief facts which led to the filing of these appeals are as Date 2018.12.04 162941 IST Reason follows The appellant was awarded companystruction work companytract on 19.12.2006 relating to balance work of 214.00 mtrs.
For the next date of hearing on 13.03.2014 the Arbitrator has recorded the finding that the appellant claimant contractor was absent without any intimation to the Tribunal.
An agreement was also entered into between the parties and clause 65 of the General Conditions of Contract companytains arbitration clause.
span C C bearings on abutment bridge over river Beas at Harsipattan on Mandi Rewalsar Chandesh Rakhota Maserah Sarkaghat Tihra Sandhole Alampur Jawalamukhi road for a sum of Rs.14,29,81,500/ .
The arbitrator entered upon reference on 11.11.2013.
Even after hearing, numberstatement of claim was filed by the appellant.
The period allowed for companypletion of work was on or before 04.01.2009.
Being aggrieved by the appointment of Superintendent Engineer, Arbitration Circle, Solan, HPPWD as the arbitrator, the appellant filed petition before the High Court under Section 11 6 of the 1996 Act praying for appointment of independent arbitrator.
The appellant raised a dispute and requested for the appointment of arbitrator vide its letter dated 18.10.2013.
Pursuant to the request of the appellant, the Chief Engineer, HPPWD appointed the Superintendent Engineer, Arbitration Circle, HPPWD, Solan as the arbitrator on 30.10.2013 and the said appointment had been made in terms of clause 65 of the agreement.
RPST/20087/2014 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in and by which the High Court dismissed the Arbitration Petition and Review Petition filed by the appellant declining to appoint arbitrator holding that as per the terms of the agreement, arbitrator had already been appointed.
On 06.08.2014, arbitration proceedings were terminated under Section 25 a of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The appellant after requesting for the appointment of arbitrator either remained absent from the proceedings or sought adjournments stating that he intends to challenge the appointment of arbitrator before the Chief Justice as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The work was companypleted by the appellant on 04.06.2011 and payment for the execution of work was made.
However, extension was granted to the appellant up to 30.06.2010.
BANUMATHI, J. Leave granted.
These appeals arise out of the judgments dated 10.03.2014 in Arbitration Case No.4049 of 2013 and dated 01.09.2014 in Review Petition No.
