M/S H S CONSTRUCTION CO vs PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS — ARB/226/2026

Case under Arbitration and Conciliation Act Section 11. Disposed: --DISMISSED on 15th May 2026.

Case disposed Next hearing 15-May-2026

CNR: PHHC010781542026

e-Filing Number

05-05-2026

Filing Number

ARB/28279/2026

Filing Date

06-May-2026

Registration No

ARB/226/2026

Registration Date

07-May-2026

Judge

Mr. Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri

Coram

Mr. Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri

Category

69.4 - ARBITRATION U/S 11 (LESS THAN 5 CRORE) ( 938 )

Judicial Branch

CIVIL REVISION BRANCH-I

Decision Date

15-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

--DISMISSED

Last updated 01-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Arbitration and Conciliation Act Section 11

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/S H S CONSTRUCTION CO

    Adv. GAURAV ARORA

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-May-2026

    Mr. Justice Jasgurpreet Singh PuriView PDF

    The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed H.S. Construction Company's petition for arbitrator appointment, holding that the contract's Clause 24 expressly excludes arbitration for contracts valued below Rs. 2 crores—requiring court recourse instead. Though the Executive Engineer suggested depositing 2% to request higher authority approval, the court ruled this did not constitute agreement to arbitration and cannot override the explicit contractual terms excluding arbitration for this contract value threshold. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 06-May-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. ARB/226/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissed H.S. Construction Company's petition for arbitrator appointment, holding that the contract's Clause 24 expressly excludes arbitration for contracts valued below Rs. 2 crores—requiring court recourse instead. Though the Executive Engineer suggested depositing 2% to request higher authority approval, the court ruled this did not constitute agreement to arbitration and cannot override the explicit contractual terms excluding arbitration for this contract value threshold. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case