Shukla Construction Vs. General Manager, East Central Railway and ors.

arbitration and conciliation act, 1996, section 11(6) - arbitrators appointment--bill raised but not paid--concerned parties appointed their arbitrators--presiding arbitrator not an independent officer--opposed by a party--presiding arbitrator must be wholly independent one--a retired judge of patna high court appointed as arbitrator to preside over arbitration proceedings--application disposed of with direction. - motor vehicles act, 1988[c.a.no.59/1988] section 166; [a.k. patnaik, cj, a.k. gohil & s. samvatsar, jj] application for compensation for personal injury death of injured claimant subsequently for some other reasons held, claim for personal injury will abate on the death of claimant. claim will not survive to his legal representative except as regards claim for pecuniary loss to estate of claimant.orderm.y. eqbal, j.1. heard the counsel for the parties on the application filed by the petitioner under section 11(6) of the arbitration and conciliation act along with the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents.2. the matter relates to a work order issued to the petitioner in 1993. when the bills submitted by the petitioner could not be passed, a dispute arose and time to time correspondences were exchanged between the parties. it appears that the parties settled their dispute at the pre-arbitration stage by referring the matter to two arbitrators nominated by each of the parties and one presiding arbitrator, namely, the general manager, east central railway, kolkata. accordingly the petitioner suggested the name of one sri a.k. rai, sr. den/3/dhn/eastern railway and the respondent nominated one sri m.k. dubey, sr. dao/eastern railway/dhn to be appointed as arbitrators, sri, r.p. kausar, sr. den/2/eastern railway/dhn was appointed as presiding arbitrator.3. the contention of the petitioner is that sri r.p. kausar, the presiding arbitrator entered the measurements in the measurement book and so he is not an independent presiding arbitrator. however, learned counsel for the parties have jointly agreed to nominate one independent person to be appointed as presiding arbitrator. i am also of the view that an independent person be appointed as presiding arbitrator.4. in view of the fair submissions made by the parties, i appoint hon'ble sri s. roy, a retired judge of the patna high court as presiding arbitrator. let the entire records of the arbitration proceeding be sent to the presiding arbitrator appointed by this court who, along with the two arbitrators, shall proceed with the arbitration proceeding and give award within a period of four months from the date of first sitting held by them. this arbitration application is, accordingly, disposed of.5. so far the cost of rs. 5,000/- imposed by order dated 4.5.2005 is concerned, learned counsel for the respondent.....