Karnataka HC Appoints One Arbitrator For Contractor’s Three South Western Railway Works Disputes

The petitioner entered into works agreements with the respondents: one dated 19 March 2020 and two dated 25 October 2019.

Disputes arose under those agreements, which contained arbitration clauses referring to paragraphs 63 and 64 of the Indian Railways Standard General Conditions of Contract, 2022.

The petitioner invoked the clauses and, after the respondents refused to refer the disputes to arbitration, sent a final notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The respondents did not reply to that notice.

The petitioner then filed these petitions seeking appointment of an arbitrator.

The respondents stated that they did not oppose appointment of a sole arbitrator, while reserving their right to raise all contentions before the arbitrator.

Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 empowers the Court to appoint an arbitrator where the agreed appointment procedure has not resulted in an appointment.

Section 21 concerns commencement of arbitral proceedings upon receipt of a request to refer a particular dispute to arbitration.

The Court also considered the arbitration clauses in the agreements, which provided for resolution of disputes and referred to paragraphs 63 and 64 of the Indian Railways Standard General Conditions of Contract, 2022.

No precedent was cited.

The Court found that the agreements contained arbitration clauses and that the petitioner had invoked them by issuing notices, including a final notice under Section 21.

The respondents’ failure to respond to that notice, together with their lack of objection to appointment of a sole arbitrator, supported referring the disputes to arbitration.

The Court left the parties’ claims and contentions open for determination by the arbitrator.

All claims and contentions were left open; the parties were directed to appear before the Centre’s Director on 23 November 2026 at 11:30 a.m.