Attorney Holder- Sri Sanjay Sharma vs The Union Of India And 3 Ors on 7 March, 2025

Gauhati High Court

Attorney Holder- Sri Sanjay Sharma vs The Union Of India And 3 Ors on 7 March, 2025

Author: Soumitra Saikia

Bench: Soumitra Saikia

                                                                             Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010061512024




                                                                      undefined

                              THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
   (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                                  Case No. : Arb.P./18/2024

            M/S B. B. ELECTRICALS
            REGISTERED OFFICE AT 65, KANTI NAGAR, PAL ROAD, JODHPUR, PIN-
            242003, RAJASTHAN, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL POWER OF
            ATTORNEY HOLDER- SRI SANJAY SHARMA, S/O- LATE JAY PRAKASH
            SHARMA, C/O- NEW J.B. COMPLEX (1ST FLOOR), FLAT NO. 103, J.P.
            AGARWAL ROAD, SANTIPUR, GUWAHATI-781009, DIST. KAMRUP (M),
            ASSAM



            VERSUS

            THE UNION OF INDIA AND 3 ORS.
            THROUGH THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, NEW DELHI-110010.

            2:THE COMMANDER WORKS ENGINEER
            TEZPUR.

            3:THE CHIEF ENGINEER

             SILIGURI ZONE
             SALUGARA
             SILIGURI-734008
             WEST BENGAL.

            4:GARRISON ENGINEER
             859 ENGR WORKS SEC
            TENGA
             PIN- 790116

Advocate for the Petitioner   : PETITIONER IN PERSON,

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. D GOGOI (Amicus Curiae),MRS. R DEVI
                                                                       Page No.# 2/3




                                BEFORE
                 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOUMITRA SAIKIA

                                     ORDER

07.03.2025
Heard Mr. B. Gogoi, learned Amicus Curiae appointed by the Court and Ms.
R. Devi, learned CGC for the respondents.

This application is filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation
Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an Arbitrator.

During the course of the arguments on the objections raised by the
respondent counsel, it was pointed out that the notice as contemplated under
Section 21 was issued by the power of attorney holder who represents the
present writ petitioner. However, the notice issued by the power of attorney
holder was on a date prior to his appointment as a power of attorney holder
which is evident from the documents enclosed.

Since the power of attorney holder was before the Court as a petitioner in
person, the Court considered it appropriate to appoint an amicus curiae.

Today when the matter is called up, learned Amicus has placed before the
Court a Judgment of Apex Court rendered in Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and
Anr. Vs. Nortel Networks India Pvt Ltd. reported in (2021) 5 SCC 738 to submit
that the petition seeking appointment of arbitrator is barred by limitation in
terms of Section 43 of the Arbitration and Cancellation Act, 1996 Act read with
Limitation Act 1963.

The learned Amicus Curiae submits that perhaps in view of the Judgment
rendered by the Apex Court the petition may not be maintainable on the ground
of limitation.

Page No.# 3/3

The learned CGC appears for the respondents also submits that the
judgment by the Apex Court had rendered that in terms of Section 43 provisions
of Arbitration Act 1996 will be applicable and is therefore covered by residual
provision of Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 196.

In view of the submissions made by the learned counsel, this Court
considers it appropriate to defer the matter as the power of attorney holder of
the petitioner who was earlier representing the matter before the Court is not
present in Court today, matter accordingly stands deferred to be listed after one
week.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant