IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH

PRINCIPAL SEAT AT JABALPUR

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
W.P. NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

SANJAY ARYA …………PETITIONER

//Versus//

State of m.p. & others ……….RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION FOR URGENT HEARING

The petitioner begs to submits as under

1. That the petitioner has filed the aforesaid writ petition before this

hon’ble court.

2. That the respondent have submitted their reply before this hon’ble

court and petitioner was filed.

3. That, looking to the effect and circumstances of the case it is

necessary to hear this writ petition finaly n motion hearing stage.

4. That, the petition is pending since 2010 and reply has already been

filed by respondent

The Hon’ble the Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi and His

companion Justices of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi

The Humble petition of

the applicant/Petitioner

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. Provision under which application is filed Section 11 of the Arbitration

& Conciliation Act, 1996.

2. Name of the applicant(S) with complete M/s Indian Railway Tourism

address (es) and Corporation Ltd.

Sh. Siya Ram, Group General

Manager, Rail Neer Project,

Having its Corporate Office

at:: 11th Floor, Statesman

Building, Barakhamba Road,

New Delhi-110001
3. Names of the other parties to the M/s Maa Tara Trader

Arbitration Agreement with complete 37, Dr. Abani Dutta Road,

Addresses. Howrah-1
4. Name and addresses of the Arbitrators, Ms. Padmakshi Raheja

if any, already appointed by parties (Nominee Arbitrator of the

Petitioner) having its office at

E-403, Som Vihar Apartment,

R.K. Puram, New Delhi-22

5. Name and addresses of the persons and The Competent Authority in

institution, if any, to whom any function IRCTC to provide panel of

has been entrusted by the parties to the Arbitrators to the parties.

Arbitration Agreement under the

appointment procedure agreed upon by

them.
6. Qualification of the Arbitrator, if any Each of the parties to

required by the Agreement. appoint one arbitrator from

the panel provided by the

Competent Authority and the

so Two Chosen or appointed

Arbitrators to appoint the Ld.

Third Arbitrator.
7. That the present application u/s 11 of the Arbitration And Conciliation

Act, 1996 has been preferred by the applicant above named praying for

appointment of arbitrator on behalf of the Respondent as the respondent

has failed to nominate its arbitrator from the panel of arbitrator provided

by the applicant.

8. That the brief facts leading to filling of the present petition is as

hereunder::

a. That the present claim is being preferred by the Indian Railway

Catering & Tourism Corporation Limited (A Govt. Of India

Enterprises) (hereinafter referred as the claimant). It is stated that

the claimant is a Public Sector Undertaking functioning under the

aegis of ministry of Railways, Govt. of Indian, New Delhi and in

order to professionalize and upgrade the standards of value edit

catering & tourism services. The claimant has pioneered online rail

ticketing and emerged as one of the leaders in e-commerce.

b. That the claimant Corporation with the objective of supplying safe

and hygenic drinking water to the passengers of railways, has set

up several plants all across the country where the claimant is

carrying out the activity of packaging drinking water in the name

and Style of “Rail Neer” a registered trade mark of the Claimant

Corporation. It is relevant to submit here that in order to supply

the packaged drinking water to the railway network the Claimanat

Corporation decided to create distribution network to supply Rail

Neer at different railway station on railways network.

c. That the Claimant in furtherance to achieve its objective decided

to float a tender and invite two bid tender system from Carrying

and Forwarding Agents for creating distribution network for supply

of packaged drinking water Rail Neer from its Nangloi and

 Danapur plant to cater and supply water to the states situated in

Northern India and Eastern India. It is relevant to submit here that

with this objective the Claimant Corporation vide its Tender Notice

dated 19-01-2005 floated Tender No. IRCTC/RN/Logistics/2005

and invited bids from CFAs and transporters for carrying out the

work of distribution of Rail Neer from the above said Rail Neer

Plants situated in Nagloi (Delhi) and Danapur (Bihar). A true copy

of the Tender Notice No. IRCTC/RN/Logistics/2005 dated 19-01-

2005 issued by the Claimant is being annexed herewith and

marked as Annexure P/1.

d. That the respondent submitted its bid for award of contract as

CFA at Kolkata for distribution of Rail Neer Packaged drinking

water in Kolkata Zone and all the nearby railway stations. It is

pertinent to mention here that as per the terms and conditions of

the tender document the successful bidder was to be appointed as

CFA for a period of three years, which was extendable on the

discretion of the claimant.

e. That vide Letter of award dated 16-02-2005, accepted the bid of

the respondent and appointed the claimant as CFA at Kolkata for a

period of three years w.e.f 01-04-2005 for distribution of “Rail

Neer”, packaged drinking water in the State of west Bengal. It is

most humbly submitted that as per the LOA, the respondent was

required to give its consent alongwith a BG/demand draft of Rs.

16,70,000/- in favor the claimant within 14 days from the date of

issuance of LOA. A true copy of the Letter of Award dated 16-02-

2005 is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P/2.

f. That it is pertinent to mention here that the respondent herein

was already operating as CFA for Kolkata since 01/04/2004. It is

further relevant to submit here that at the relevant time there was
 a due of Rs. 63,36,537/- upon the respondent at the time of

award of the contract for three years.

g. That the respondent accepted the terms and condition of the

award of contract as CFA and deposited security deposit of Rs.

16,70,000/- with the claimant for acting as CFA for Kolkata.

h. That in furtherance of the LOA, the respondent entered into an

agreement dated 10-03-2005 with the claimant acknowledging the

terms and conditions of the contract of distribution of “Rail Neer”

packaged drinking water in the state of West Bengal. A true copy

of the agreement dated 10-03-2005 entered between the claimant

and the respondent herein is being annexed herewith and marked

as Annexure P/3.
i. That the respondent was required to place indent to the Rail Neer

Plant Patna with detail number of crates required on the basis of

demand at the stations.

j. That as per Clause 6.2 of the Tender Document which was a part

of the agreement signed between the parties, the respondent was

to have a warehouse/office at Patna with transportation and all

the communication facilities. It was the responsibility of the

respondent to store/warehouse “Rail Neer” packaged Drinking

Water crates at its own cost and risks. It was further mandated in

the aforesaid Clause that the respondent/CFA must also have

similar facilities as stated herein above at Kolkata for storing Rail

Neer crates.
k. That it is pertinent to mention here that the respondent was also

responsible to protect the crates of Rail Neer from theft, injury or

other damage due to moisture, improper temperature control,

improper or unusual location or injurious contact.

l. That as per the terms and conditions of the contract the

respondent was required to raise invoices and collect cash from

the licensees of the static catering units and mobile catering units
 towards sale of Rail Neer, on behalf of IRCTC and further to

provide the Rail Neer to the departmental unit on the basis of

stock transfer.
m. That the claimant placed indent to Rail Neer Plant from time to

time and took delivery of the consignment during the contractual

period w.e.f. 01.04.2004 and supplied Rail Neer crates to the

above mentioned units realizing prescribed sale value. It was

further mandated in the tender document that the respondent

would be depositing the amount realized from the licensees of

IRCTC as sale proceeds of Rail Neer, packaged drinking water

within one day of realization with the bank of IRCTC.

n. That it is pertinent to mention here that the respondent on expiry

of the aforesaid contract of CFA requested the claimant to extend

the contract.
o. That on the basis of the request made by the respondent herein,

the claimant vide its letter dated 24-03-2008 extended the

contract of respondent for a period of one year w.e.f. 01-04-2008.

It was mentioned therein that in case of finalization of the fresh

tendering process the contract so extended may be terminated

before the expiry of the terms of the extended period. A true copy

of Letter of extension dated 24-03-2008 issued by the claimant to

the respondent is being annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure P/4.
p. That it is pertinent to mention here that since the claimant was

maintaining a running Statement of Account of the respondent in

which the respondent deposited amount from time to time during

the currency of its contract however it is most humbly submitted

that the respondent always failed to deposit the entire dues of the

claimant and always requested for some more time to enable the

respondent to clear the dues of the claimant.

q. That since the tendering process for award of fresh contract for

CFA was under process and the term of the contract of supply by
 the respondent was supposed to end on 31-03-2009, keeping in

view the importance of supply of water in West Bengal, the

claimant on request of the respondent vide its letter dated 20-03-

2009 further extended the contract of the respondent for a period

of six months from 01-04-2009. A true copy of the Letter of

Extension dated 20-03-2009 is being annexed herewith and

marked as Annexure P/5.

r. That vide letter dated 24-09-2009, the claimant further extended

the contract period for another six months. A true copy of the

letter dated 24-09-2009 is being annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure P/6.
s. That vide letter dated 31-03-2010, the claimant further extended

the contract period for another six months. A true copy of the

letter dated 31-03-2010 is being annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure P/7.
t. That vide letter dated 01-07-2010, the claimant further extended

the contract period for another one months. A true copy of the

letter dated 01-07-2010 is being annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure P/8.
u. That vide letter dated 27-07-2010, the claimant further extended

the contract period for another six months. A true copy of the

letter dated 27-07-2010 is being annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure P/9.
v. That it is pertinent to mention here that all the above mentioned

extensions were granted by the clamant in exercise of its power

under clause 5.1 of the GCC and thus the services of the

respondent were continued in view of the above clause of the

contract.
w. That it is pertinent to mention here that since the very inception

when the respondent was appointed as CFA, the record reveals

that the respondent, in utter disregard to the provision of

agreement and with dishonest intention, did not deposit the entire
 proceeds with the claimant. The respondent infact kept on

depositing part amount of the consignment which was credited to

the account of the applicant towards part payment. The details of

supply made by the applicant to the respondent is being put under

a Chart for the convenience of Your Lordships. A true copy of the

Chart reflecting the supply and payments made by the respondent

to the applicant herein is being annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure P/10.
x. That since the respondent failed to deposit the entire amount

during the subsistence of the contract between the parties; the

claimant started demanding the dues from the respondent. It is

pertinent to mention here that when the contract was finally

terminated by the claimant for non-payment of dues and for other

defaults committed by the respondent then at that relevant point

of time the respondent owed Rs. 6,12,96,429/- as dues towards

the sale proceeds of Rail Neer Pacakaged drinking water.

y. That it is pertinent to mention here that the above chart would

reflect that the respondent during financial year 2012-2013 had

deposited a sum of Rs.24,00,000/- and thus the dues as in

financial year 2011-12 got reduced to Rs. 5,88,96429/- only.

z. That the respondent in admission of the afore stated dues in the

above shown Chart further deposited a sum of Rs. 20,00,000/- in

the financial year 2013-14 and thus by end of financial year 2012-

13 the total dues remained upon the respondent in favor of the

claimant as Rs. 5,68,96,429/-

aa. That it is relevant to submit here that as per the closure

balance in 2013-14, after all the adjustments towards commission

to the respondent, sale to DARCL, the respondent owed as dues

an amount of Rs. 5,3474,373/- towards the claimant.

bb. That in view of the above chart it becomes evident that though

respondent owed money to the Claimant even then the

respondent continued to deposit insufficient amount with

 dishonest intention to misappropriate the Government money and

thus committed offences like criminal breach of trust,

misappropriation of Govt. money etc which are punishable under

IPC.
cc. That since the respondent stopped making payments of the

outstanding amount therefore the claimant herein raised a dispute

and requested for Conciliation proceedings between the parties to

contract.
dd. That it is pertinent to mention here that before the conciliation

proceedings there was a meeting held between the officials of the

claimant and the respondent wherein the respondent admitted to

certain liability against the total claim of the claimant herein. The

said chart where the respondent admitted part of the present

claim was prepared by the parties reflecting the status of parties

since the year 2004 till the year 2013 and the same was duly

signed and acknowledged by the representative of the claimant

and respondent herein. A true copy of the Chart dated 08-05-2013

duly signed by the parties herein above is being annexed herewith

and marked as Annexure P/11.

ee. That thereafter the respondent herein stopped depositing the

dues which were ought to have been cleared by the respondent

during the subsistence of the contract or latest by cessation of the

contract which was terminated by the claimant on account of

failure of respondent in fulfilling its obligations under the contract

and failing to clear the dues of the claimant within the stipulated

time as mentioned in the contract.

ff. That in view of the request made by the Claimant, the claimant

corporation vide its letter dated 03-10-2013 issued to the

respondent wherein it was stated that in view of the Clause 5.1 of

the Contract, a panel of three conciliators was sent to the

respondent so that the respondent may choose one amongst the

 three names suggested by the competent authority and

conciliation proceedings may be commenced as was desired by

the claimant from the competent authority. A true copy of the

letter No. IRCTC/EZ/Rail Neer/2013 dated 03-10-2013 is being

annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P/12.

gg. That the respondent vide its letter dated 21-10-2013 replied to

the above said letter and suggested name of one Kamal Mohan

JGM, Rail Neer, IRCTC to be appointed as sole Conciliator between

the parties in dispute resolution relating to recovery of dues from

the respondent herein. A true copy of the letter dated 21-10-2013

by the respondent is being annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure P/13.
hh. That the Competent Authority vide its letter dated 11-11-2013

appointed one Shri Kamal Mohan, JGM-Rail Neer, IRCTC as the

Sole Conciliator for resolution of dispute between the parties

herein above. A true copy of the Letter No.

IRCTC/RN/Logistics/2005 dated 11-11-2013 is being annexed

herewith and marked as Annexure P/14.

ii. That the competent authority vide its letter dated 13-11-2013

informed the respondent regarding the appointment of the

abovenamed Sole Conciliator. A true copy of the letter

IRCTC/RN/Logistics/2005 dated 13-11-2013 is being annexed

herewith and marked as Annexure P/15.

jj. That the conciliation proceedings commenced before the Ld. Sole

Conciliator and there held altogether six conciliation sittings before

the Ld. Sole Conciliator.

kk. That on 17-06-2014 the Ld. Sole Conciliator closed the

conciliation proceedings as the representative of the respondent

stopped attending the conciliation proceedings. Thus in view of

the same the Ld. Sole Arbitrator vide its report dated 17-06-2014

closed the conciliation proceedings as the same had failed. A true

 copy of the Report of the Ld. Sole Conciliator dated 17-06-2014 is

being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P/16.

ll. That after the conciliation proceedings failed the Petitioner invoked

arbitration clause and in compliance of the agreed procedure for

appointment of arbitrator as enumerated in arbitration clause 5 of

the agreement, the petitioner herein vide its letter No.

2013/IRCTC/Rail Neer/275 dated 11-07-2014 requested the

Respondent to nominate its nominee to act as Arbitrator on its

behalf within ten days from the panel of Arbitrators so provided to

the respondent by the Competent Authority in compliance of the

procedure as laid down in Clause 5 of the Tender Document which

contained the Arbitration Agreement between the parties. A true

copy of the letter No. 2013/IRCTC/Rail Neer/275 dated 11-07-

2014 is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P/17.

mm. However the respondent in utter disregard of the provisions of

agreement and with ulterior motive of misappropriation of the

amount of the PSU/applicant and to delay the proceedings

deliberately did not appoint or nominate a person from the list of

the person so provided by the Competent Authority as arbitrator

so that the arbitral tribunal could have been constituted by the

Competent Authority.
nn. That it is pertinent to mention here that rather than appointing

arbitrator the respondent chose to file W.P. No. 27627(W)/2014

before the Hon’ble Kolkata High Court wherein the respondent

herein prayed for issuance of writ of mandamus directing the

applicant corporation to continue with the Conciliation proceeding.

A true copy of the W.P. No. 27627/2014 filed before the Hon’ble

Calcutta High Court is being annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure P/18.
oo. That in the meantime since the respondent herein started

paying no heed to the reminders of the claimant, the Claimant

 herein filed a Complaint under Section 156(3) of Cr. P. C. before

the Ld. Court of ACJM, Danapur for registration of FIR against the

respondent company and its representative for cheating and

misappropriation of funds of the claimant. It is pertinent to

mention here that the Ld. Court in Danapur treated the said

complaint as a complaint u/s 200 of Cr.P.C. A true copy of the

Complaint No. 1519/2014 pending in the Court of ACJM, Danapur

is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P/19.

pp. That it is relevant to submit here that the accused therein the

criminal case is not appearing before the Hon’ble Court of ACJM,

Danapur and hence the Ld. Court vide its order dated 02-09-2014

has been pleased to issue Non-Bailable Warrants against the

accused named therein.

qq. That it is relevant to submit here that the competent authority

after waiting for response from the respondent for more than a

year went on to constitute arbitral tribunal by nominating one of

the Arbitrators on behalf of the respondent and referred the

matter in dispute to the arbitral tribunal and the same was

informed to the respondent vide letter dated 18-06-2015.

rr. That the competent authority in exercise of its power referred the

matter for arbitration in view of the arbitration clause as contained

under the said clause of GCC. The Competent Authority in view of

provisions contained under Clause 5 of the GCC vide its letter

dated 18-06-2015 constituted Arbitral tribunal consisting of three

Ld. Arbitrators and referred the dispute to the tribunal. A true

copy of letter No. 2013/IRCTC/Rail Neer/275 dated 18-06-2015 is

being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P/20.

ss. That in pursuance of the reference the Hon’ble Tribunal vide its

order dated 10-07-2015 informed the parties to appear before it

on 29-07-2015.
tt. That on receiving the aforesaid two communications dated 18-06-

2015 and 10-07-2015, the respondent moved two applications

 CAN No. 7050/2015 and CAN No. 7051/2015 in W.P. No.

27672(W) of 2014 before the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta. It is

pertinent to mention here that the respondent herein by way of

aforementioned Misc. Applications prayed for impleadment of the

Hon’ble Tribunal as a party to the writ petition and further prayed

for setting aside of the letters dated 18-06-2015 and 10-07-2015.

A true copy of the CAN No. 7151/2015 and CAN 7050/2015 both

in W.P. No. 27672(W) of 2014 is being annexed herewith and

marked as Annexure P/21 and P/22 respectively.

uu. That on 29-07-2015 the petitioner herein appeared before the

Hon’ble Tribunal however the respondent/applicant chose to not

to appear before the Hon’ble Tribunal although being aware of the

date of hearing before the Hon’ble Tribunal. A true copy of the

order dated 29-07-2015 passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal is being

annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P/23.

vv.That in the meantime, the Hon’ble High Court vide its order dated

21-08-2015 passed in W.P. No. 27672(W) of 2014 was pleased to

dismiss the writ petition as withdrawn. The Hon’ble High Court

further recorded in its order dated 21-08-2015 that the CAN 7151

of 2015 and CAN 7150 of 2015 were being dismissed with the

consent of the parties. A true copy of the order dated 21-08-2015

passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Calcutta in W.P. No.

27672(W) of 2014 is being annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure P/24.
ww.That the petitioner herein filed its Claim Petition before the Ld.

Arbitral Tribunal wherein the petitioner claimed an amount of Rs.

5,34,74,373/- from the respondent herein which was legitimate

dues of the petitioner herein. A true copy of the Claim Petition is

being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P/25.

xx. That on 14-10-2015, the respondent appeared through counsel

before the Ld. Arbitral Tribunal and the counsel requested for
 adjournment to enable the Ld. Counsel to file the Counter

Statement to the Claim Petition of the petitioner. The Hon’ble

Tribunal was pleased to grant two months time to the respondent

to file the counter statement alongwith Vakalatnama in favor of

the Ld. Counsel. A true copy of the order dated 14-10-2015

passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal is being annexed herewith and

marked as Annexure P/26.

yy.That in the month of December,2015 the respondent rather than

filing its defence, with the motive of delaying the proceedings filed

an application under Sec. 16 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act,

1996. A true copy of the Application u/s 16 of the Arbitration &

Conciliation Act, 1996 is being annexed herewith and marked as

Annexure P/27.
zz. It is relevant to submit here that the respondent by way of the

aforesaid application challenged the appointment/constitution of

the Arbitral Tribunal in as much as the same was to consist of an

Arbitrator, which was to be appointed by the Respondent.

aaa.It is relevant to submit here that the respondent by way of the

aforesaid application was trying to take benefit of its own wrong.

bbb. That the petitioner filed its response/ counter affidavit to the

Application of the Respondent and the petitioner herein primarily

took a defence that the application was barred by Section 13 of

the Arbitration & Conciliation Act wherein it is mandated that in

case some one is aggrieved by the constitution of Tribunal then

the same must be challenged within 30 days from the date when

the aggrieved party became aware of constitution of such an

Arbitral tribunal. A true copy of the Reply to Section 16 Application

is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P/28.

ccc. That the respondent herein filed rejoinder to the counter affidavit

of the petitioner to the Section 16 Application moved by the

respondent herein before the Arbitral Tribunal. It is pertinent to

mention her that in the rejoinder the respondent herein made

 averment that the respondent herein had no grievance/doubt

about the credibility of the Arbitrators. A true copy of the

Rejoinder Affidavit to Section 16 Application under Arbitration &

Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by the Respondent herein before the

Ld. Tribunal is being Annexed herewith and marked as Annexure

P/29.
ddd. That during the pendency of the Application u/s 16 of the

Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner preferred a

petition u/s 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 bearing

OMP (I) Comm. No. 106/2016 before this Hon’ble Court.

eee.That in response to the Application u/s 16 of the Arbitration &

Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner herein filed its reply wherein

it was stated that the same was not maintainable however the Ld.

Tribunal vide its order dated 23-06-2016 was pleased to allow the

application u/s 16 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 preferred

by the respondent herein and held that the Ld. Tribunal has no

jurisdiction to entertain the Claim Petition of the petitioner. A true

copy of the order dated 23-06-2016 passed by the Ld. Arbitral

Tribunal is being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure

P/30.

fff. That this Hon’ble Court vide its order dated 14-07-2016 passed in

OMP (I) (Comm.) No. 106/2016 was pleased to allow the prayer

of interim relief u/s 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996

and was pleased to direct the respondent to not to

transfer/allinate or create third party interest on its assests and

was further pleased to direct the respondent herein to furnish

affidavit to the petitioner stating the details of the assets held by

the respondent. A true copy of the order dated 14-07-2016

passed by this Hon’ble Court in OMP (I) (Comm.) N0. 106/2016 is

being annexed herewith and marked as Annexure P/31.

9. That as per Clause 5 of Section 4 of the GCC, it has been agreed between

the parties that in case of any breach/dispute arising between the parties to

the agreement then the same shall be resolved by way of arbitration Clause

5 Settlement of dispute is reproduce :

5.1. Any dispute or claim arising out of / relating to this contract or

the breach, termination or the invalidity thereof, whether

arising during the period of the services or after the completion

or abandonment thereof shall in the first place be referred to a

mutually agreed sole conciliator to be appointed by IRCTC.

5.2. The Conciliator shall make the settlement agreement after the

parties reach an agreement and shall give an authenticated

copy thereof to each of the parties.

5.3. The settlement agreement shall be final and binding on the

parties. The settlement agreement shall have the same status

and effect of an arbitration award.

5.4. The views expressed, the suggestions, admissions made by

either party in the course of conciliation proceedings shall not

be introduced as evidence in any arbitration proceedings.

5.5. Any dispute that cannot be settled through the conciliation

procedure shall be referred with twenty eight (28) days to

Arbitration in accordance with the following:

(a) Matters to be arbitrated upon shall be referred to a sole

arbitrator where the total value of dispute does not exceed

Rs. 15 lakhs. Beyond the dispute limit of Rs. 15 lakhs, there

shall be three arbitrators.

(b) For those disputes to be decided by a sole arbitrator, IRCTC

shall prepare a panel of three arbitrators, out of which the

supplier will choose one.

 (c) For those dispute to be decided by three arbitrators, IRCTC

shall prepare a panel of five arbitrators. The supplier and

IRCTC shall choose one arbitrator each and the two so

chosen shall choose the third arbitrator from the said panel,

who shall act as the presiding arbitrator of the arbitration

panel.

(d) If, in a dispute subject to the arbitration, the supplier fails

to appoint the arbitrator as per clause 5.5(b) of the CC

within Twenty Eight (28) days after IRCTC has nominated

the panel, then IRCTC may nominate an arbitrator from the

panel of arbitrator, for the settlement of dispute.

(e) If, in a dispute subject to CC clause 5.5(c ) the two chosen

arbitrators fails to appoint the third arbitrator within Twenty

Eight (28) days after they have been appointed, then IRCTC

may nominate the third arbitrator from the panel for the

settlement of matter in dispute.

(f) In case three arbitrators are appointed, the award by the

majority will prevail upon. Neither party shall be limited in

the proceeding before arbitrator/s to the evidence or

arguments put before IRCTC for the purpose of obtaining

his decision. No decision given by IRCTC in accordance with

the foregoing provisions shall disqualify him from being

called as a witness and giving evidence before the

arbitrators/s. The arbitration hearing shall be held in Delhi

only. The award shall be made in writing. The arbitrator

shall always give item-wise and reasoned awards in all

cases where the total claim exceed Rs. 10 lakhs.

5.6. There shall be no suspension of work on account of arbitration

provided that the obligations of IRCTC and the supplier shall

 not be altered by reasons of arbitration being conducted during

the progress of works. Neither party shall be entitled to

suspend the work to which the dispute relates on account of

arbitration.

5.7. The arbitration proceedings shall be governed by The Indian

Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, as amended from time to

time including provisions in force at the time the reference is

made.

5.8. Where the arbitration award is for payment of money, not

interest shall be payable on whole or any part of the money for

any period, till the date on which the award is made.

5.9. The cost of arbitration shall be borne by the respective parties.

The cost shall inter-alia include the fees of the arbitration(s) as

per the rates fixed by the arbitrator from time to time.

5.10. The parties agree to comply with the awards resulting from

arbitration and waive their rights to any form of appeal insofar

as such waiver can validly be made.

10. That in view of the above the parties have agreed to resolve their

disputes by way of arbitration and have decided to appoint an Arbitral

Tribunal consisting of Three ld. Arbitrator where the amount of dispute

exceeded Rs. 15 Lacs and above to adjudicate upon the dispute which

has arisen between the parties.

11. That the Respondents have failed to perform their part of the agreement

though the applicant has performed it’s part of the obligations and

adhered to it. It is further relevant to submit here that the respondent

has been delaying and evading to appear before the forums wherein the

respondent has been asked to appear in connection with the dispute with

the applicant herein with a motive to frustrate the claim of the applicant

which will be a loss to the govt. exchequer.

12. That in gross violation of the terms of the contractual agreement, the

applicant has been subjected to harassment, disturbances and

continuous losses due to one reason or the other by the respondent. The

Applicant fears that Respondents may abscond or may become traceless

which is evident from the fact that the the respondent only appeared

before the Ld. Court of Judicial Magistrate after the Ld. Court issued Non

Bailable Warrants against the proprietor of the respondent firm. It is

further submitted that till date the respondent firm proprietor has not

appeared before the Hon’ble Trial Court in Patna and in all the likelihood

the Ld. Trial Court would initiate proceedings under Section 82 and

Cetion 83 of Cr. P.C. on next date of hearing.

13. That it is also clear from the act of the respondent that rather than

appointing its arbitrator, the respondent kept silent all the time and only

when the Ld. Tribunal was constituted then appeared and challenged the

appointment of the arbitral tribunal, thus it becomes evident that the

respondent is making all its efforts to frustrate the legitimate claim of the

applicant by adopting delaying tactics.

14. That it is further relevant to submit here that the respondent after nearly

reaching to the settlement in the Conciliation proceeding, withdrew from

the conciliation process and thereafter once the conciliation proceedings

were closed then again with ulterior motive approached Hon’ble High

Court for issuance of directions for commencing or continuing the

conciliation proceedings. This reflects that the respondent is trying to

misappropriate the amount due upon the respondent by its acts by

delaying the proceedings.

15. That after the conciliation proceedings failed the Petitioner invoked

arbitration clause and in compliance of the agreed procedure for

appointment of arbitrator as enumerated in arbitration clause 5 of the

agreement, the petitioner herein vide its letter No. 2013/IRCTC/Rail

 Neer/275 dated 11-07-2014 requested the Respondent to nominate its

nominee to act as Arbitrator on its behalf within ten days from the panel

of Arbitrators so provided to the respondent by the Competent Authority

in compliance of the procedure as laid down in Clause 5 of the Tender

Document which contained the Arbitration Agreement between the

parties.

16. That in terms of Section 11(4) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996,

in an arbitration, if the parties fail to appoint an arbitrator within thirty

days (30 days) from the receipt of the request to do so from the other

party then the appointment shall be made, upon the request of a party,

by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Hon’ble Supreme Court or as the case

may be by the Hon’ble Chief Justice of the Hon’ble High Court or any

person or institution designated by him.

17. That the cause of action arose in New Delhi as the agreement between

the parties was entered into in New Delhi and also as per Clause 5.5 (f)

the parties have agreed to agitate its disputes in Delhi.

18. That the aforesaid cause of action has arisen in New Delhi as the

agreement was arrived at New Delhi and the part payments were made

from time to time by the respondent and accepted in New Delhi. The

parties have also agreed and accepted in the agreement to sell that only

the Courts in Delhi would have jurisdiction to entertain the dispute.

Therefore this Hon’ble Court has territorial jurisdiction to try and

entertain the Petition.

19. That it is most humbly submitted that the cause of action arose on 11-

07-2014 when the petitioner invoked arbitration and respondent failed to

appoint arbitrator.

20. The Petitioner had commenced the Arbitration proceedings against the

Respondent however in view of the order passed by the Ld. Tribunal

 ruling on its own jurisdiction wherein it held that it lacks jurisdiction to

proceed with the arbitration proceedings.

21. That the cause of action continue to arise in favor of the petitioner in as

much as the Ld. Tribunal has refused to continue with the arbitral

proceedings in view of its lack of jurisdiction and till date the respondent

has failed to appoint its arbitrator.

22. That the petitioner has not filed any petition u/s 11 of the Arbitration &

Conciliation Act, 1996 nor there is any petition pending relating to the

subject matter of the above captioned petition before any court of law or

before this Hon’ble Court or in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

23. That states and submits that the annexures filed alongwith the present

petition are true copies of its originals.

24. That for the purposes of court fees, the pecuniary jurisdiction of this

Hon’ble Court is fixed above Rs.1 crore as the petitioner is claiming more

than Rs. 5,34,74,373/- (Rupees Five Crores Thirty Four Lacs Seventy

Four Thousand Three Hundred and Seventy Three only)from the

respondent and as such the requisite court fees of Rs.20/-is being

affixed on the present petition.

25. That the instant petition is a commercial matter of more than Rs.1 crore

pecuniary value and the subject matter of the dispute is a commercial

dispute as defined in section 2(1)(c) of the Commercial Courts,

commercial division and commercial appellate division of High Courts

Act, 2015.
26. That the present petition is bona fide and it is in the interest of justice

that the same may kindly be allowed in terms of the relief sought herein.

PRAYER

In view of the above stated facts and circumstances it is most humbly

prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

i. Appoint Arbitrator as per the provisions of the Arbitration &

Conciliation Act, 1996;

ii. pass ad interim exparte order in terms of prayer (a) above and

confirm the same after notice to the Respondent;

 iii. award costs of the present proceedings in favour of the

applicant and against the respondent;

iv. pass any other and/or further orders which this Hon’ble Court

may deem fit, just and proper, in the facts of the case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS AND JUSTICE, THE APPLICANT

HEREIN, AS IN DUTY BOUND, SHALL EVER PRAY.

Date: -09-2016 Applicant

New Delhi IRCTC

Through
Divya Prakash Pande
Advocate of the Applicant
323, New Lawyers Chamber,
Supreme Court of India, Bhagwan
Das Road,
New Delhi-110001

VERIFICATION

Verified at New Delhi on this day of September, 2016 that the contents of
paras 1 to 26 of the Application are true to my knowledge and belief and is
based on the records maintained by the applicant company and on the legal
advice received and nothing material has been concealed thereof.

Applicant
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016
IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indin Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. …..Petitioner

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Traders …………….………………Respondents

AFFIDAVIT

I, Rajesh Dhawan, S/o Sh. Late P.P.Dhawan, aged 53 years, working as Joint

General Manager, Rail Neer in the Petitioner/Applicant Corporation having its

registered office at 11th Floor, Statesman Building, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-

110001, presently in New Delhi do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under: -

1. That I am working as Joint General Manager, Rail Neer of the

Petitioner/Applicant Company in the above said matter and as such I am

fully conversant with the facts circumstance of the case and competent to

swear this affidavit.

2. That the accompanying OMP under Section 11 of the Arbitration &

Conciliation Act, 1996 has been drafted by my counsel under my instruction

and the same is read and understood by me and the content of the same

are true to my knowledge and belief and nothing material has been

concealed therefrom.

3. That the contents of the instant affidavit are true and correct to the best of

my knowledge and nothing has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
I, Rajesh Dhawan , above named Deponent verify that the contents of Para 1 to 3

of the affidavit are true to the best of my knowledge. No part of it is false and

nothing material has been concealed therefrom

Verified at New Delhi on 6th day of September, 2016

DEPONENT
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
Arbitration Application NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indin Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. …..Petitioner

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Traders …………….………………Respondents

AFFIDAVIT

I, Rajesh Dhawan, S/o Sh. Late P.P.Dhawan, aged 53 years, working as Joint

General Manager, Rail Neer in the Petitioner/Applicant Corporation having its

registered office at 11th Floor, Statesman Building, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi-

110001, presently in New Delhi do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under: -

1. That I am working as Joint General Manager, Rail Neer of the

Petitioner/Applicant Company in the above said matter and as such I am

fully conversant with the facts circumstance of the case and competent to

swear this affidavit.

2. That the accompanying Application u/s 151 of C.P.C. has been drafted by my

counsel under my instruction and the same is read and understood by me

and the content of the same are true to my knowledge and belief and

nothing material has been concealed therefrom.

3. That the contents of the instant affidavit are true and correct to the best of

my knowledge and nothing has been concealed therefrom.

DEPONENT
VERIFICATION:
I, Rajesh Dhawan, above named Deponent verify that the contents of Para 1 to 3

of the affidavit are true to the best of my knowledge. No part of its is false and

nothing material has been concealed therefrom

Verified at New Delhi on 6th day of September, 2016

DEPONENT
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indin Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. …..Petitioner

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Traders …………….………………Respondents

URGENT APPLICATION
To,

The Registrar,

Delhi High Court,

New Delhi

Sir,

The Applicant/Petitioner have filed the above petition/application U/s 11 of

Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed today on -09-2016. You

are requested to treat the petition as urgent as interim directions have been

sought from the Hon’ble Court.

FILED ON: –09-2016 FILED BY

(Divya Prakash Pande )

323,New Lawyers Chambers
Supreme Court, New Delhi
Ph.No.23070061, 9818077123
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indin Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. …..Petitioner

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Traders …………….………………Respondents

NOTICE OF MOTION

Take notice that the accompanying petition/application will be listed before

Court on -09-2016 at 10.30 O’ Clock in the forenoon, or so soon thereafter as may

be convenient to the Court.

Delhi

Dated -09-2016 Filed by

(Divya Prakash Pande)

323, New Lawyers Chambers
Supreme Court, New Delhi
Ph. No. 23070061, 9818077123
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indin Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. …..Applicant

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Traders …………….………………Respondents

MEMO OF PARTY

Indian Railway Tourism and Corporation Limited

Through Mr. Siya Ram

Group General Manager, Rail Neer Project

Having its Corporate Office at::

11th Floor, Statesman Building,Barakhamba Road,

New Delhi-110001 …………Applicant

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Trader

Through its Proprietor Shri Surendra Nath Singh

37, Dr. Abani Dutta Road,

Howrah-1 …….……Respondent

Dated -09-2016 Filed by

(Divya Prakash Pande)

323, New Lawyers chambers
Supreme Court, New Delhi

Ph. No. 23070061

 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indin Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. …..Applicant

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Traders ……………………Respondents

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL

PROCEDURE FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING THE TYPED COPIES OF

THE DIM ANNEXURES P/1 to P/ 30 .

To,

The Hon’ble Chief Justice and his companion judge of High Court of Delhi at

New Delhi.

The humble petition of

petitioner above- named

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-

1. That the present application u/s 11 of the Arbitration And Conciliation Act,

1996 has been preferred by the petitioner for appointment of arbitrator on

behalf of the respondent.

2. That the facts of the case have been detailed in the Petition u/s 9 of the

Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 and are not being repeated in the

present application for the sake of brevity. The petitioners crave leave of the

Hon’ble Court to refer to and rely upon the same for the purposes of this

application.

3. That due to the paucity of time the petitioner may be exempted from filing

the typed copies of the Dim Annexure P/1 to P/30 which are being filed by

the petitioner along with the petition.

4. That in case the petitioner is not granted exemption from filing the typed

copies of the Dim Annexure then the petitioner would face irreparable loss

and sufferings and moreover the purpose of filing the petition would

frustrate.

5. That the balance of convenience lies in the favour of the petitioner herein

and there is all likelihood that the petitioner may succeed before this Hon’ble

Court.

PRAYER

It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be

pleased to::

(i) Exempt the petitioner from filing the typed copies of the

Dim Annexure P/ 1 to P/32 and

(ii) pass such other or further order as this Hon’ble Court

deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances

of the case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONER AS IS DUTY BOUND

SHALL EVER PRAYS.

FILED ON: –09-2016. Applicant/IRCTC

Through

(Divya Prakash Pande)

323, New Lawyers Chambers
Supreme Court, New Delhi
Ph.No.23070061,
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indin Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. …..Applicant

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Traders …………….………………Respondents

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 151 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL

PROCEDURE FOR EXEMPTION FROM FILING THE ORIGINALS OF THE

DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE PETITIONER/APPLICANT.

To,

The Hon’ble Chief Justice and his companion judge of High Court of Delhi at

New Delhi.

The humble petition of

petitioner above- named

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:-

1. That the present application u/s 11 of the Arbitration And Conciliation

Act, 1996 has been preferred by the petitioner for appointment of

arbitrator on behalf of the respondent.

2. That the facts of the case have been detailed in the Petition u/s 11 of the

Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 and are not being repeated in the

present application for the sake of brevity. The petitioner craves leave of

the Hon’ble Court to refer to and rely upon the same for the purposes of

this application.

3. That applicant/petitioner has filed true copies of the documents

alongwith the petition and may be exempted from filing originals of the

documents filed by the petitioner along with the present petition.

However the petitioner undertakes that as and when directed by this

 Hon’ble Court the petitioner shall produce the originals of the documents

filed along with the present petition.

4. That in case the petitioner is not granted exemption from filing the

Original Documents then the petitioner would face irreparable loss and

sufferings and moreover the purpose of filing the petition would

frustrate.

5. That the balance of convenience lies in the favour of the petitioner herein

and there is all likelihood that the petitioner may succeed before this

Hon’ble Court.

PRAYER

It is therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be

pleased to::

(i) Exempt the petitioner from filing the Original documents; and

(ii) pass such other or further order as this Hon’ble Court deem fit and

proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

AND FOR THIS ACT OF KINDNESS THE PETITIONER AS IS DUTY BOUND

SHALL EVER PRAYS.

FILED ON: –09-2016 Applicant/IRCTC

Through

(Divya Prakash Pande)

323, New Lawyers Chambers
Supreme Court, New Delhi
Ph.No.23070061,
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indin Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. …..Applicant

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Traders …………….………………Respondents

Nature of Matter::

A PETITION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ARBITRATION & CONCILIATION

ACT, 1996.

Statute Involved::

THE ARBITRATION & CONCILIATION ACT, 1996.

Advocate::

Counsel for the Petitioner Counsel for the Respondents

D. P. Pande
323, New Lawyers Chamber,
Supreme Court of India,
Bhagwan Das Road,
New Delhi-110001

Interlocutory Applications (IA’s)

Sl. No. of Filed by Provisions of Nature of Relief Remark

No year Petitioner/ Law Sought
Respondent
1. 2016 Petitioner U/s 151 of Exemption
C.P.C.
2. 2016 Petitioner U/s 151 of Exemption
C.P.C.
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indin Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. ….. Applicant

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Traders …………….………………Respondents

FOLDER –II (IA’s)

1. Index 1 -

2. I.A. No. ______ of 2016:: An application for

Exemption from filing typed copies of Dim
Annexures alongwith affidavit.

3. I.A. No. ______ of 2016:: An Application for

exemption from filling the original Documents filed
by applicant alongwith Affidavit.

FILED ON: –09-2016 FILED BY

(Divya Prakash Pande)

Advocate for the Applicant
323, New Lawyers Chamber,
Supreme Court of India, Bhagwan
Das Road,
New Delhi-110001
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indin Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. ….. Applicant

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Traders …………….………………Respondents

FOLDER –III

1. Index - 1 -
2. Vakalatnama

FILED ON: –09-2016 FILED BY

(Divya Prakash Pande )

Advocate for the Applicant
323, New Lawyers Chamber,
Supreme Court of India, Bhagwan
Das Road,
New Delhi-110001
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indin Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. ….. Applicant

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Traders ….………………Respondent

AFFIDAVIT/STATEMENT OF TRUTH

I, Rajesh Dhawan, S/o Sh. Late P.P.Dhawan, aged 53 years, working as

Joint General Manager, Rail Neer in the Petitioner/Applicant Corporation

having its registered office at 11th Floor, Statesman Building, Barakhamba

Road, New Delhi-110001, presently in New Delhi do hereby solemnly affirm

and declare as under: -

1. That I am working as Joint General Manager, Rail Neer of the

Petitioner/Applicant Company in the above said matter and as such I am

fully conversant with the facts circumstance of the case and competent

to swear this affidavit.

2. I am sufficiently conversant with the facts and have also examined all

relevant documents and records in relation thereto.

3. I say that the statements made in para no. 1 to para no. 14 are true to

my knowledge and based on facts and information received which I

believed to be correct and statements made in para no. 15 to para no.

27 are based on legal advice and the last para is a humble prayer.

4. I say that there is no false statement or concealment of any material

facts, documents or record and I have included information that is

according to me, relevant for the present petition.

5. I say that all documents in my power, possession, control or custody

pertaining to the facts and circumstances of the proceedings initiated by

 me are not necessary for the present petition and if directed can be filed

and been disclosed and copies of the necessary documents thereof are

only annexed with the petition.

6. I say that the above mentioned pleading comprises of a total of 24

pages, each of which has been signed by me.

7. I state that the annexures hereto are true copies of the documents

referred to and relied upon by me.

8. I say that I am aware for any false statement or concealment, I shall be

liable for action taken against me under the law.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION:
I, Rajesh Dhawan, above named Deponent verify that the contents of Para 1

to 8 of the affidavit are true to the best of my knowledge. No part of its is

false and nothing material has been concealed therefrom

Verified at New Delhi on 6th day of September, 2016

DEPONENT
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indin Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. ….. Applicant

//Versus//

M/s Maa Tara Traders ….………………Respondent

CAVEAT REPORT U/S 148-A OF THE CPC

No Caveat Notice has been received by the petitioner nor its Counsel till date in

terms of Section 148-A of the Code of Civil Procedure.

FILED ON: –09-2016 FILED BY

(Divya Prakash Pande)

Advocate for the Applicant
323, New Lawyers Chamber,
Supreme Court of India, Bhagwan
Das Road,
New Delhi-110001
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
O.M.P. (I) (COMM.) NO. _____/2016
IN THE MATTER OF :-
Indian Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. …..Petitioner
//Versus//
M/s Maa Tara Traders ………….………………Respondent
FOLDER –IV
[List of Documents alongwith documents filed by the Petitioner with the Petition
as per Order XI Rule 2 of Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and
Commercial Appellate Division of High Courts Ordinance, 2015]
Volume II (1-191)
Index (1-2)
Documents (3-191)

S. Detail of Document(s) Documents Original Mode of Line of Pg.

No in power, s or Execution/ Custody No.
possession, Photoco issuance or
control, pies or receipt
custody of Office
Copies
1. Tender Notice No. Petitioner Photo Issued by 3-80
IRCTC/RN/Logistics/2005 copy Petitioner
dated 19-01-2005.
2. Letter of Award dated 16-02- Respondent Photo Issued by 81
2005. copy Petitioner
3. Agreement dated 10-03-2005 Photo Between 82-84
entered between the copy Petitioner
Petitioner and Respondent. and
Respondent
4. Letter of extension dated 24- Respondent Photo Issued by 85
03-2008. Copy Petitioner
5. Letter of Extension dated 20- Respondent Photo Issued by 86
03-2009. Copy Petitioner
6. Letter dated 24-09-2009. Respondent Photo Issued by 87
Copy Petitioner
7. Letter dated 31-03-2010. Respondent Photo Issued by 88
Copy Petitioner
8. Letter dated 01-07-2010. Respondent Photo Issued by 89
Copy Petitioner
9. Letter dated 20-07-2010. Respondent Photo Issued by 90
Copy Petitioner
10. Chart reflecting the supply Petitioner Photo Prepared by 91-95
and payments made by the Copy Petitioner
respondent to the Petitioner
11. Chart dated 08-05-2013. Petitioner Photo Prepared by 96
Copy Petitioner
12. Letter No. IRCTC/EZ/Rail Respondent Photo Issued by 97
Neer/2013 dated 03-10-2013. Copy Petitioner
13. Letter dated 21-10-2013. Petitioner Photo Issued by 98
Copy Respondent
14. Letter No. Respondent Photo Issued by 99
IRCTC/RN/Logistics/2005 Copy Petitioner
dated 11-11-2013.
15. Letter No. Respondent Photo Issued by 100
IRCTC/RN/Logistics/2005 Copy Petitioner
dated 13-11-2013.
16. Report of the Ld. Sole Respondent Photo Issued by 101
 Conciliator dated 17-06-2014. Copy the Ld.
Conciliator
17. Letter No. 2013/IRCTC/Rail Respondent Photo Issued by 102-
Neer/275 dated 11-07-2014. Copy Petitioner 103
18. Copy of the W.P. No. Third Party Photo Filed by 104-
27627/2014 filed before the Copy Respondent 133
Hon’ble Calcutta High Court
19. Copy of the Complaint No. Third Party Photo Filed by the 134-
1519/2014 pending in the Copy Petitioner 139
Court of ACJM, Danapur
20. Letter No. 2013/IRCTC/Rail Respondent Photo Issued by 140-
Neer/275 dated 18-06-2015. Copy Petitioner 141
21. Copy of the CAN No. Third Party Photo Filed by 142-
7151/2015 in W.P. No. Copy Respondent 148
27672(W) of 2014.
22 Copy of the CAN No. Third Party Photo Filed by 149-
7150/2015 in W.P. No. Copy Respondent 167
27672(W) of 2014.
23. Order dated 29-07-2015 Third Party Photo Passed by 168-
passed by the Hon’ble Copy Ld. Arbitral 169
Arbitral Tribunal. Tribunal
24. Order dated 21-08-2015 Third Party Photo Passed by 170
passed by the Hon’ble High Copy Hon’ble
Court of Calcutta in W.P. No. High Court
27672(W) of 2014 of Calcutta
at Kolkata
25. Claim Petition Third Party Photo Filed by 171-
Copy Petitioner 189
26. Order dated 14-10-2015 Third Party Photo Passed by 190-
passed by the Hon’ble Copy Ld. Arbitral 191
Tribunal in the Claim Petition Tribunal
27. A true copy of the Third Party Photo Prepared by
Application u/s 16 of the Copy Respondent
Arbitration & Conciliation
Act, 1996
28. A true copy of the Reply Third party Photo Prepared by
filed by the Petitioner herein Copy Petitioner
to the Application under
Section 16 of the Act moved
by the Respondent herein
before the Ld. Tribunal.
29. A true copy of the Rejoinder Third Party Photo Prepared by
Affidavit filed by the Copy Respondent
Respondent herein to Section
16 of the Arbitration &
Conciliation Act, 1996
30. A true copy of the order dated Petitioner Photo Passed by
23-06-2016 passed by the Ld. Copy the Ld.
Arbitral Tribunal Tribunal
31. A true copy of the order dated Petitioner Photo Passed by
14-07-2016 passed by this Copy this Hon’ble
Hon’ble Court in OMP (I) Court.
(Comm.) N0. 106/2016
FILED ON: –03-2016 FILED BY

(Divya Prakash Pande)

Advocate for the Petitioner
323, New Lawyers Chamber,
Supreme Court of India, Bhagwan Das Road,
New Delhi-110001 Ph. No. 011-23070061, 9818077123
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
O.M.P. (I) (COMM.) NO. _____/2016

IN THE MATTER OF :-

Indian Railways Catering & Tourism Corporation Ltd. …..Applicant

//Versus//
M/s Maa Tara Traders ………….………………Respondent

FOLDER –I

1. Urgent Application - -
2. Notice of Motion
3. Memo of party
1. Application under section 11 of the arbitration and

conciliation act, 1996 for appointment of

arbitrator on behalf of the respondent alongwith

affidavit.

FILED ON: –09-2016 FILED BY

(Divya Prakash Pande)

Advocate for the Petitioner
323, New Lawyers Chamber,
Supreme Court of India, Bhagwan Das
Road,
New Delhi-110001
Ph. No. 011-23070061, 9818077123