24 July 2021| Mohd. Iqbal v. Union of India | Arb. P. 84 of 20021 | Sanjeev Narula J | 2021 SCC OnLine Del 3776

The Delhi High Court appointed a sole arbitrator in a “never-ending arbitration” case where six arbitral tribunals had earlier been constituted. The application had been made because there was no tribunal in place then. The officers who had comprised the tribunal from time to time resigned, retired, or were transferred.

After the last tribunal had been “terminated”, the petitioner made “several requests”, but the respondent did not reconstitute the tribunal.

Narula J rejected the argument that the petitioner was to be blamed for the delay because he did not agree to the Railways’ proposal in 2019 to apply the new (post-2015 Amendments clauses) of the general conditions of contract and have the dispute adjudicated by a sole arbitrator.

He noted Union of India v. Singh Builders Syndicate, (2009) 4 SCC 523, where the Supreme Court had “expressed its anguish at how the Railways repeatedly furnished panels containing names of officers who were due for transfer in the near future.” Further, he said that in exceptional circumstances—and this case was one—the contractual appointment procedure could be overridden (citing North Eastern Railways v. Tripple Engineering Works, (2014) 9 SCC 288. He also noted the law that the respondent lost the right to appoint once a petition for the appointment was filed.

A sole arbitrator was thus appointed.

Access the judgement here.