MADNANI ENGINEERINGS WORKS vs UNION OF INDIA

Judgment text excerpt

$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 25.03.2026 + ARB.P. 1532/2025 MADNANI ENGINEERINGS WORKS .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Ashish Khorana, Advocate versus UNION OF INDIA .....Respondent Through: Mr. Premtosh K. Mishra, CGSC, Mr. Shrey Sharma, Mr. Anubhav Upadhyay and Mr. Arpit Bamal, Advocates CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR % JUDGEMENT (ORAL) I.A. 23242/2025 (For Delay of 13 days in Re-Filling the Petition.) 1. The present application, under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeks condonation of delay of 13 days in re-filing the present Petition. 2. For the sufficient reasons stated in the application, the delay is condoned. Application stands disposed of. ARB.P. 1532/2025 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [“the Act”], seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties arising out of the Rate Contract dated 23.11.2012 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed ARB.P. 1532/2025 Page 1 of 8 By:HARVINDER KAUR BHATIA Signing Date:27.03.2026 16:23:32 [“Agreement”]. 2. The said Agreement contains an Arbitration Clause, being Clause 24, which reads as under: “24. ARBITRATION (i) In the event of any question, dispute or difference arising under these conditions or any special conditions of contract or in connection with this contract (except as to any matters the decision of which is specially provided for by these or the special conditions) the same shall be referred to the sole arbitration of an officer in the Ministry of Law, appointed to be the arbitrator by the Director General of Supplies & Disposals. It will be no objection that the arbitrator is a Government Servant that he had to deal with the matters to which the