Karnataka HC Appoints Sole Arbitrator For Railway Contractor’s Unresolved Disputes After Earlier Arbitral Award Was Set Aside

The petitioner was awarded a railway construction contract under an agreement dated 19 August 2011.

A three-member Arbitral Tribunal later made an award on 20 May 2022, which the Commercial Court set aside on 20 August 2024.

The petitioner’s earlier petition for appointment of an arbitrator, CMP No. 157/2025, was dismissed.

In a subsequent appeal, the Division Bench clarified that the parties were not precluded from constituting a tribunal to adjudicate disputes that remained unadjudicated.

The petitioner then invoked Clause 64 of the General Conditions of Contract (GCC) by notice dated 15 November 2025; the respondents did not respond.

The petitioner sought appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides for court intervention in the appointment of an arbitrator in the circumstances specified by that provision.

Section 21 concerns commencement of arbitral proceedings upon a request for referral of a dispute to arbitration.

The Court relied on the arbitration clause in Clause 64 of the GCC and the Division Bench’s clarification that the parties were not precluded from constituting a tribunal to decide disputes that remained unadjudicated.

The earlier dismissal of CMP No. 157/2025 did not bar the present petition because the Division Bench had expressly clarified that the parties could constitute a tribunal for disputes left unadjudicated.

The petitioner invoked Clause 64 by issuing a notice under Section 21, and the respondents did not respond.

Given the arbitration clause and the outstanding disputes, the Court held that appointment of a sole arbitrator was required.

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