Bharat Traders And Suppliers vs. Braithwaite And Company Limited
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, Bharat Traders and Suppliers, filed a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking the appointment of a sole arbitrator. The petitioner was awarded a contract by the respondent, Braithwaite and Company Limited, for the supply, installation, commissioning, and maintenance of a polyhouse under the NABARD’s RIFD Scheme. The respondent issued a purchase order dated July 19, 2024, for a total contract value of Rs. 104,86,07,000, inclusive of GST. This purchase order, unilaterally drafted by the respondent, contained a dispute resolution clause mandating adjudication by a sole arbitrator. Disputes arose concerning the execution of the contract. The respondent did not dispute the purchase order or the arbitration clause.
Held
The Court held that it should appoint a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences between the parties. With the consent of both parties, the Court appointed Mr. Sujoy Paul, Former Chief Justice of the High Court, as the learned sole Arbitrator. The Arbitrator is required to enter upon the reference after making the necessary disclosure under Section 12(1) of the Act and subject to Section 12(5). The Arbitrator's remuneration will be fixed as per the Fourth Schedule of the Act or by mutual agreement. All questions concerning the arbitrability of the disputes, maintainability, admissibility of claims, limitation, jurisdiction, and other issues were expressly left open to be decided by the learned Sole Arbitrator.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Court should appoint a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences arising out of the purchase order dated July 19, 2024, under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996? The petitioner argued that disputes had arisen concerning the execution of the contract and sought the appointment of an arbitrator as per the dispute resolution clause in the purchase order. The respondent, represented by counsel, did not dispute the purchase order or the arbitration clause contained within it. The respondent's counsel stated agreement to the appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.
Sections Cited
Section 11(6), Section 12(1), Section 12(5)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
OCD-37 ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL DIVISION ORIGINAL SIDE
AP-COM/775/2026 BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH Date : 23rd September, 2026. Appearance: Mr. Sourav Kumar Mukherjee, Adv. Ms. Sahana Pal, Adv. Mr. Souhardya Mitra, Adv. ..for the petitioner
Mr. Sayan Banerjee, Adv. ..for the respondent
The Court: Affidavit of service and Notice of Motion are taken on record. The petitioner has preferred the present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a learned sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences arising out of the purchase order dated 19th July, 2024. The petitioner is a registered partnership firm, was awarded the contract by the respondent Braithwaite and Company Limited for the purpose of supply, installation, commissioning and maintenance for Naturally ventilated polyhouse under the NABARD’s RIFD Scheme in Garhwal region of the State of Uttarakhand.
2 The respondent issued a purchase order bearing no.464000001 dated 19th July, 2024 for a total contract value of Rs.104,86,07,000/-, inclusive of GST. The said Purchase Order, unilaterally drafted by the respondent, provided for all the terms and conditions which the parties were obliged to honour. On the basis of the representation made by the respondent, the petitioner accepted the contents of the said Purchase Order and agreed to act in terms thereof. The purchase order contains a dispute resolution clause providing for all disputes arising between the parties to be adjudicated by a sole Arbitrator. Learned Counsel for the respondent does not dispute the said purchase order nor does he disputes the arbitration clause contained in the said purchase order. Disputes subsequently arose between the parties concerning the execution of the contract. Learned Counsel for the respondent states that he is agreeable to appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, this Court appoints Mr. Sujoy Paul, Former Chief Justice of this Court, as the learned sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences that have arisen between the parties. The learned Sole Arbitrator shall enter upon the reference after making the disclosure in terms of Section 12(1) of the Act and subject to the provisions of Section 12(5) thereof. The learned sole Arbitrator shall be entitled to fix the remuneration in accordance with the Fourth Schedule of the Act or as may be mutually agreed between the parties.
3 A copy of this order shall be communicated by the petitioner to the learned sole Arbitrator for necessary action. It is clarified that all questions relating to the arbitrability of the disputes, maintainability, the admissibility of the claims, limitation, juri iction, and all other issues are left open to be urged before the learned Sole Arbitrator, who shall decide the same in accordance with law. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition stands disposed of.
(GAURANG KANTH, J.)
bp.
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.