In cases of Appeal the order passed in present petitions would be subject to any order passed by the subordinate court

Yugashree | School of Law Sastra University, Thanjavur | 6th April 2020

SOWIL LIMITED vs. INDIAN HIGHWAYS MANAGEMENT COMPANY LIMITED

Facts:

The applicant was granted a Work Order by the Judgement Debtor for the conduct of Traffic Surveys using Portable Automated Traffic Counters & Classifiers (ATCC) Systems on National Highways for a total of 10 rounds of traffic surveys at traffic survey locations in Zone 5 (Orissa, West Bengal, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram & Nagaland) and a contract was executed between the parties. Disputes have arisen between the parties. After that both the parties settled the matter amicably between them and it was recorded by the court and the Petitioner will continue to conduct the traffic surveys at the L-1 rates quoted in the new tender. The court after recording the statement of the parties disposed the case. Interim orders were made and it directed the petitioner to continue to work on the sites which are allocated already and for the remaining sites the respondent is free to allot it to any 3^rd party.

After the petition was disposed the petitioner filed an application under section17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act before an Arbitrator on 2 problems firstly the judgment debtor was not permitting the applicant to conduct the balance survey and 2^nd applicant was not permitted access of Judgment Debtor’s portal.

The Learned arbitrator dealing with the case is of the view that Claimant will continue to function under the contract in compliance with the agreed L-l rates throughout the duration of the arbitration proceedings and it has been accepted by the parties. It was argued that, without a survey and access to the database, the claimant was unable to raise its receipts in the absence of a data update, because the payments were based on the issue of a confirmation certificate. Even after the order issued by the Arbitrator, the Judgement Debtor didn’t even allow the applicant to perform the survey and access the portal and the applicant filed an application before this court. The court directed the respondent to follow the orders of the tribunal.

Applicant’s Submission:

Given the fact that three orders have been passed, one by this Court and two by the Tribunal, the Judgement Debtor does not permit the claimant to perform a balance survey and to access the Judgement Debtor Web Portal. The applicant is therefore not in a position to upload traffic data as needed under the contract. This is not only in breach of the orders of the Tribunal, but also of the order of the Tribunal.

Respondent’s Submission:

Judgement Debtor accepted and asked for time to take orders, and the matter was adjourned. Counsel for the respondent has also taken instructions on this proposal and is agreeable to the same. Arbitration appeal against the order of the Tribunal is pending before the Coordinate Bench of that Court and, in the event that the present execution petition is approved, the Arbitration Appeal will be made unsuccessful.

Decision:

Judgement Debtor is hereby directed to grant the claimant access to the web portal of the Judgment Debtor, i.e.

http:/ihmcl.anantchaitanya.com/login.php, for the uploading of traffic data under the contract between the parties and pursuant to the order of this Court as well as the order of the Arbitrator. The order passed in the present petition would be subject to any order passed by the Co-ordinate Bench.