Pre-arbitration dispute resolution steps must be exhausted before arbitration; bypassing the Engineer and Adjudicator made the petition premature.

A contractually staged dispute-resolution mechanism must be followed before arbitration is invoked: disputes were first to go to the Engineer, then to the Adjudicator within the prescribed time, and only thereafter to arbitration. Because the applicant did not seek the Engineer's decision and also prevented the Adjudicator from acting by disputing that forum's authority, the pre-conditions to arbitration were not exhausted and had not been waived. The arbitration clause continued to operate despite alleged termination of the contract, but it could be enforced only after compliance with the agreed preliminary steps. The Section 11(6) application was therefore premature and not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was maintainable when the contractual procedure requiring reference of disputes first to the Engineer and then to the Adjudicator had not been followed.

Analysis: The contract provided a staged dispute-resolution mechanism: a decision by the Engineer, a challenge before the Adjudicator within the prescribed time, and only thereafter reference to arbitration. The applicant had not invoked the Engineer's decision-making step and had also prevented the Adjudicator from proceeding by disputing the very authority of that forum. The contractual pre-conditions to arbitration were therefore not exhausted and had not been waived by the opposite party. The arbitration clause remained operative despite the alleged termination of the contract, but it could be enforced only after compliance with the agreed preliminary steps.

Conclusion: The application was not maintainable as premature and was dismissed.

---