Suryadevara Sambasiva Rao v. Union of India
Court: High Court for State of Telangana
Bench: MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court for State of Telangana judgment dated 2026-04-24. Suryadevara Sambasiva Rao v. Union of India. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
[ 3405 ] IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA ARBITRAT oN APPLICATION NO: 106 0F 2025 Between: Rao Street Suryadevara Sambasiva Rao, 40-25-41 KC , Akhil Estates, Patamatalanka, Vijayawada Andhra Pradesh-520010' ... Applicant AND Union of lndia, ReP. bY Railway, Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad 1. The General Manager South central Telangana-500025. Division, South Central Railway 2. Additi6nal Divisional Manager, Hyderabad Secunderabad-500025. south central Railway 3. The Divisional Engineer/Lines, Hyderabad Division, Secunderabad-500025. south central 4. The senior Divisional Engineer/coord. , Hyderabad Division, Railway Secunderabad-s0OO2s. ...
Respondents of Arbitration and conciliation Act' Arbitration Application under section 11(6) pleased to that this Hon'ble court may be 1996 and rules framed thereunder praying judicial officer appoint an independent as sole arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties in respect of agreement dated 08'03'2022' Counsel for the Applicant: Mr. Prasad Rao Vemulapalli Gounsel for the Respondents: Mr. V. T. Kalyan (SC FOR CENTRAL GOVT) The Court made the following: ORDER ? IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD THE HON'BLE JUSTICE MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA ARBIT RATION APPLICATION No. lO6 of2025 DATEt 24. o4. 2026 Be twee n: Mr. Slr n,ad evara Srrmbasiva Rao ..... Applicant AND Union of India, Rep. by the General Manager, South Central Raihvay Rail Nilayam, Secunderabad, Telanqan:r- 50002 5 and 3 othcrs ... Respondents Mr. Prasad Rao \ cmul;Lpalli, learned counsel appearing for the applicant Mr. \''l'. Kalyan, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
ORDER: 1. The prescnt Arbitration Application has been filed under section I 1(6) ot The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appoirltment ol an independent judicial ofhcer as Sole Arbitrator for adjudic. rtion o[ the disputes between the parties in respect o[ Agreement datcd 08. O3. 2022. \ 2 . : l\ltlJ t06 2025 that this is the fourth occasion 2. The Proceeding Sheet shows The respondents wcre on which the matter has been taken up from time represented on each occasion and stlught adjournment an adjournment ln to time. Even today, tJ:e respondents seek sought on behalf of the view of the repeated adjournments respondents, this Court deems it fit to proceed with the hearing of the Arbitration APPlication 3. TheArbitrationAgreementiscontainedinClause6a(1)(i)of Thc General Conditions o[ Contract ('GCC') ot South Central Railway. The disputc between the parties relates to Clau se 46A 1 of GCC which provides for price variation during the execution of the work of u'ork.
The applicant is a Contractor who was awarded Junction (DN)-performing: (1) Mudkhed Junction-secunderabad Secunderabad CTR(P)- 1 . O50 km and amp 'Junction-Dhone and (2) Secunderabad Junction (SL)-CTR(P)- 13. 750 Km amp km zrnd amp (3) Junction-Dhone Junction (SL)-CTR(P)-7'600 Secunderabad-Dhonesections:CTR(P)ofExg-52kgl90UTSrails Nos/km density wiLh new 60 kg/90 UTS on PSC 5 sleepers 1540 rails on new PSC6 sleepers 1660 Nos'/km for a length of 2'60 kms (By PQRS only) in connection with CTR (P) oi 6 55 kms for a Iength of 2$O km to be completed on or before 17 08 2022' The details of MBJ AA )06 2025 the Agrcement entered into between the p. trties would be evident from the records flled beforc this Court. 4. The applicant nor,,' claims price variatign cost amounting GCC approxrmately to Rs. 70,OO,OOO/-. Clause 6a(1)(i) of the provides for resolutiort oI disputes through Arbitratiotl. 5.
The counter fited by' the respondents does not contain any sLatemcnr dispuring :hc validity o[ the Arbitration Agreement. All the statcments rnade in the counter relate to the merits ol the dispurc. 6. The pctitioncr invokctl the Arbitration Clause otl 30. L2. 2024. Howevcr, the responclents have lailed to respond. ln any event, whethcr the clispute involvcs excepted matters is an issue which is u,ithin Lhe domain of thc Arbitrator. The respondents have neither disputcd the existenco or validity of the Arbitration Clause in their counter aftidavit nor advanced an1'submissions in that regard. t \ 8. Hence, this Court is of the view that the Arbitration Application mar' lre al]o$'ed and an Arbitrator be appointed for the adjudication of the disputes belwcen the parties. 9. In the circumstances, Sri D. Hemanth Kumar (Retired I)istrict . ludgc). R/o H. No. 8-3-ll14ll/1O1, Flat No. I01, .. ,-,- MBJ AA 106.
2025 Kanakadharas Ramakrupa Enclave, Keshav Nagar, Yetlareddyguda, VTC: Khairatabad, pO Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad - 5OOO73, Mobile No. 83O g28OZ3, is appointed as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. The parties shall appear before the Sole Arbitrator on 08. O5. 2026 at I i :O0 A. M. , along with a copy of this order. The Sole Arbitrator shall thereafter proceed with the Arbitra_l proceedings in accordarce with law. 10. The. parties are at liberty to raise all the contentious issues before the learned Sole Arbitrator, The fee of the Arbitrator as well as the other terms and conditions shall be settled by the parties in c<ln sultation with the Sole Arbitrator so appointed. I l. Arbitration Application No. 106 of 2O2S rs accordingly allowed. All connected applications shall stand closed. Sd/- M. VIJAYA BHASKER JOINT REGlST //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFlCER To, 1. Sri D. Hemanth Kumar (Retired District Judge) H. No . 8-3-1114t1t1O1, Ftat No.
101, Kanakadharas Ramakrupa Errclave, Keshav Nagar, Yellareddyguda, WC: Khairatabad, PO: Srinagar Colony, Hyderabad 500073, Mobite No. 830928073 (By Special Messenger)(Along with a Copy of affidavit and material papers) 2. One CC to Mr. prasad Rao V^emulapalli, Advocate tOpUCI 3. one CC to Mr. V. T. Katyan (SC FoR CENiCaiEon topUCI 4. Two CD Copies KAM d, HIGH COURT DATED: 2410412026 HES \ :\ zffi ORDER osHN i ,')_ r ARBAPPL. No. 106 of 2025 * 'tl.. \? g;l,-. ri:,r. ALLOWING THE ARBITRATION APPLICATION b $-
Source: High Court for State of Telangana. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.