SARASWAT TRADING AGENCY AWARDHOLDER Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAWS(CAL)-2004-3-30
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on March 04,2004

SARASWAT TRADING AGENCY, AWARD-HOLDER Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA Respondents





Cited Judgements :-

SARASWAT TRADING AGENCY VS. UNION OF INDIA [LAWS(CAL)-2004-6-64] [REFERRED TO]
HARSHADBHAI GORDHANDAS SHAH VS. PRATIPBHAI RAVIPRASAD SANGHVI [LAWS(GJH)-2014-3-16] [REFERRED TO]
VEENA TRIPATHI VS. HARDAYAL [LAWS(DLH)-2012-5-575] [REFERRED TO]
VASANTH COLOUR LABORATORIES PVT. LTD. VS. DIVYA DEVI [LAWS(KAR)-2016-1-205] [REFERRED TO]
KHANNA TRADERS VS. SCHOLAR PUBLISHING HOUSE P. LTD. [LAWS(DLH)-2017-3-133] [REFERRED TO]
SHRI JAICHANDLAL ASHOK KUMAR & CO. PVT. LTD. VS. NAWAB YOSSUF & ANR. [LAWS(CAL)-2017-2-76] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)this is an application under s. 47 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "the cpc."). The judgment-debtor (union of india, through the general manager, south eastern railway. Garden reach) has filed this application.
(2.)briefly stated, the facts relevant for disposal of this application are these. In terms of a contract executed between the judgment-debtor and the award-holder on february 25th, 1886 the award-holder was engaged for handling goods, parcels and luggage booked at itwari, kamptee, kanhan bhandara road, tumsar road and tirora stations. Clause 24(b) of the contract provided as follows :
"24(b). The contractor/contractors is/are required to give a no claim certificate before the security deposit is refunded to him/ them. The right to claiming any amount or disputing any decision shall be deemed to have been waived as soon as the security deposit is received back by the contractor/ contractors on submission of the no claim certificate. If, however, the contractor/contractors has/have any dispute or difference he/they should submit a list of such disputed items and the amount claimed against each for final settlement. The provision of cl. 32 of this agreement will be limited to the disputes/differences mentioned in this list submitted by the contractor. The railway administration will be at liberty to withhold refund of the security deposit till finalisation of the disputes and the contractor shall have no claim for compensation or otherwise for the delay for refund of the security amount."

(3.)the contract, in its cl. 32(a), contained the following arbitration agreement :
"32(a). If any dispute, difference or question shall arise between the railway administration and the contractor as to the respective rights, duties and obligations of the parties hereto or as to the construction or interpretation of any of the terms and conditions of this agreement or as to its application (except in matter the decision whereof is herein expressly provided for and also excepting the matters regarding which the contractor has submitted no claim certificate), then the same shall be referred to the sole arbitrator of the general manager of the south eastern railway or if he be unable or unwilling to act then to the sole arbitrator of any person appointed by him on his behalf and the decision of the general manager or of the person so appointed shall be final and binding on the parties hereto under the provisions of the arbitration act."



Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.