Court No. - 7
Case :- ARBITRATION AND CONCILI. APPL.U/S11(4) No. - 20 of 2018 Applicant :- M/S Mittal Associates Opposite Party :- Mathura Vrindavan Development Authority Through Secy. And 4 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Dixit,Anupam Shyam Dwivedi,Smt. Richa Dixita Counsel for Opposite Party :- Dharmendra Singh Chauhan
Hon'ble Surya Prakash Kesarwani,J.
On 17.5.2018, this Court passed the following order :
"Heard Sri Sudhir Dixit, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri A.K. Tripathi, holding brief of Sri Dharmendra Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the opposite parties.
By order dated 6.2.2018, the opposite parties were granted two weeks time to obtain instruction or to file counter affidavit. On 5.4.2018 and 12.4.2018 the case was passed over on the illness slip of Sri Anupam Shyam Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicant. On 3.5.2018 one week's and no more time was granted to the opposite parties to file counter affidavit. On 10.5.2018, the Court passed the following order:
"Despite order dated 3.5.2018, the respondent has not filed counter affidavit. Today Sri Dharmendra Singh Chauhan, learned counsel for the respondent has sent illness slip.
The case is passed over. List on 17.5.2018."
Despite stop order, no counter affidavit has been filed by the opposite parties.
This application has been filed under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') praying for appointment of an arbitrator on the ground that the applicant entered into an agreement with the opposite parties for certain civil work. The contract contains an arbitration clause but despite notices including the notice dated 16.11.2017, the opposite parties have not appointed an arbitrator. Therefore, the applicant has filed the present application for appointment of an Arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Act.
Learned counsel for the opposite parties could not dispute that there exist an agreement between the parties which contains an arbitration clause and there is some dispute between the parties. Therefore, an arbitrator needs to be appointed under Section 11(6) of the Act.
In view of the aforesaid, let Mr. Justice V.M. Sahai, a retired Acting Chief Justice of High Court, Gujarat, R/o 138-A, Hashimpur Road, Allahabad (U.P.), Mobile No.09792801849, 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 ten days from today.\ List on 29.05.2018".
As per office report dated 28.5.2018, 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 V.M. Sahai, a retired Acting Chief Justice of High Court, Gujarat, R/o 138-A, Hashimpur Road, Allahabad (U.P.), Mobile No.09792801849 is appointed as an Arbitrator to enter upon the reference, and to adjudicate the dispute in accordance with the provisions 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/