Court No. - 10
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 15914 of 2017 Petitioner :- M/S S.K. Construction Company Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Ashfaq Ahmed Ansari Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Arun Tandon,J. Hon'ble Mrs. Rekha Dikshit,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing counsel for the State-respondents.
The special conditions and general conditions of the contract as referred to at page 28 of the paper book being part of the contract bond have not been brought on record of the present writ petition and therefore, this Court is not in a position to examine as to whether the contract contains an arbitration clause or not.
In the totality of the circumstances on record, we dismiss the present writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to invoke the arbitration clause, if any, between the parties or else he may file a suit for recovering the money in respect of the work said to have been completed by him.
Learned counsel for the petitioner states that there is no bar to avail statutory alternative remedy first before filing writ petition (reference the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Rajasthan State Electricity Board versus Union of India reported in 2008 (5) SCC 632).
So far as the legal principle stated by the Apex Court in the case of Rajasthan State Electricity Board (supra) is concerned, there can be no two views, however, in the facts of the case we find that issues of facts are involved, which require consideration of oral as well as documentary evidence. Writ may not be proper remedy. Such issues can be more appropriately tried in suit proceedings.
We in the facts of the case deem it fit and proper to insist upon the petitioner to seek his remedy by way of civil suit or by invoking the arbitration clause.
The present writ petition is dismissed subject to the observations made above.
(Rekha Dikshit, J.) (Arun Tandon, J.) Order Date :- 17.4.2017 Sushil/-