Court No. - 7
Case :- ARBITRATION AND CONCILI. APPL.U/S11(4) No. - 34 of 2018 Applicant :- M/S J.K. Construction Company Opposite Party :- Chief Engineer, Allahabad And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
In this application an order dated 18.5.2018 for appointment of an Arbitrator was passed as under:
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned standing counsel for respondents.
In similar application being ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION APPLICATION U/S11(4) No. - 36 of 2018, this Court passed an order dated 30.04.2018, as under:-
"List revised. Case called out.
In view of office report dated 27.4.2018, service of notice upon the respondent is deemed sufficient.
This application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') has been filed by the applicant praying for appointment of an Arbitrator on the ground that the applicant has entered into an agreement with the opposite party no.2 on 31.8.2007 to carry out certain civil work. Since there arose some dispute between the applicant and the opposite parties, therefore, the applicant filed a Writ C No.14186 of 2015 which was disposed of by Division Bench of this Court by order dated 9.11.2016 observing that in case the petitioners are aggrieved, they would have alternative remedy to approach for arbitration. In paragraph 9 of the affidavit accompanying the application it is stated that Clause 34(A)(iii) of the agreement contains an arbitration clause. Correspondences dated 23.9.2017, 25.10.2017, 13.11.2017 and 29.1.2018 filed as Annexure nos.3, 4, 5 and 6 to the affidavit indicates that the respondent no.1 admits that the applicant has entered into a contract with the opposite parties which contains an arbitration clause but despite consent of the applicant for appointment of an independent and impartial arbitrator, the opposite parties have not appointed an arbitrator. Therefore, the applicant has filed the present application for appointment of an arbitrator.
In view of the aforesaid, let Mr. Justice Sabhajeet Yadav, a retired Judge of this Court, R/o 7/5/1 A.N. Jha Marg, George Town, Allahabad (U.P.), Mobile No.9415344663 be appointed Arbitrator to resolve the dispute subject to his consent in terms of the Sub- Section (8) of Section 11 of the Act.
The Registry is directed to obtain consent of the proposed arbitrator in terms of amended provisions of Sub-Section (8) of Section 11 of the Act within a period of two weeks from today.
List on 18.05.2018."
Learned counsels for the parties jointly submit that in the present case also, an arbitrator may be appointed in terms of the order aforequoted.
In view of the aforesaid, let Mr. Justice Sabhajeet Yadav, a retired Judge of this Court, R/o 7/5/1 A.N. Jha Marg, George Town, Allahabad (U.P.), Mobile No.9415344663 be appointed Arbitrator to resolve the dispute subject to his consent in terms of the Sub- Section (8) of Section 11 of the Act of 1996.
The Registry is directed to obtain consent of the proposed arbitrator in terms of amended provisions contained in Sub-Section (8) of Section 11 of the Act within a period of two weeks from today.
List on 29.05.2018. ".
As per office report dated 29.5.2018, the proposed Arbitrator has sent his consent vide letter dated 28.5.2018 in terms of Section 11(4) of the Act of 1996.
In view of the aforesaid, Mr. Justice Sabhajeet Yadav, a retired Judge of this Court, resident of 7/5/1, A.N. Jha Marg, George Town, Allahabad (U.P.), Mobile No. 9415344663, is appointed as an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute subject to his consent in terms of Sub-Section (8) of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996.
The Arbitrator shall be entitled to fees in accordance with the amended fourth Schedule to the Act of 1996. The expenses shall be borne equally by the parties.
The application is allowed.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 Ak/