AIR 2018 (NOC) 65 (BOM.) FULL BENCH ::2017 (6) ABR 215 ::(2017) 2 ArbiLR 386 ::(2017) 2 AllMR 291 (BOM) ::2017 (177) AIC (SOC) 5 (BOM)

Bombay High Court

Hon'ble Judge(s): Anoop V. Mohta, R. M. Savant, G. S. Kulkarni , JJJ

(A) Arbitration and Conciliation Act (26 of 1996) S. 8 — Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act (3 ofآ 1888), S. 348 — Reference to arbitration — Worksآ  contract between Municipal Corporation and contractors — Clause 96 providing for resolution of dispute between Engineer and contractor by referring matter to Municipal Commissioner — آ Clause 97 of General Conditions of آ Contract is Arbitration Clause, covering every facet of arbitration — Clause 96 is not mentioning that Clause 97 would only be in respect of matters which have arisen under Clause 96 — Clause 97 can be said to encompass all آ disputes and differences arising before or after completion of آ work — Invocation of Clause 96 is not precursor to invocation of Clause 97 — Claim for first time can be made before arbitrator by following procedure laid down in Clause 97. Arbitration Suit No. 3540 of 1992 (Bom), Overruled; 2006 (6) ABR (DOC) 182, Approved. {" Clauseآ 96 of General Conditions of Contract between Municipal Corporation and contractor provides a mechanism to resolve doubts, disputes or differences which may arise between contractor or engineer or any other officer of آ Corporation. The same would result in removal of difficulties faced by contractor on site so that work can be proceeded with. It provides with reference of said dispute to Municipal Commissioner. Municipal Commissioner however is not final authority whose decision becomes final and ....