Full Text
Translation output
$-9 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
ARB.P.464/2012
U/S lANS PVT LTD Petitioner
Through Mr.Shantanu Singh,Adv. j
ARB.P.464/2012
U/S lANS PVT LTD Petitioner
Through Mr.Shantanu Singh,Adv. j
VERSUS
i MS TRUTH MEDIA PVT LTD
! Through None.
GORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH Respondent A
12.02.2013 Respondent has been served. No one is present on behalf of the
I respondent.
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11 i
(6)ofthe Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment ofa sole arbitrator.
! The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is engaged in the business of electric media production, repurposing services and providing different types ofcontent in various fonnats and medium. It is stated in the petition thatthe petitioner entered into an agreement dated 16'*^ April,2011 i with respondent to produce monthly magazine in English language for the responident. It is further stated in the petition that an amount of
?19,30j,250/-including servicetax,startingfrom April,2011 to September, 2011 was due from the respondent. The petitioner requested the respondent to mahe the payments ofthe outstanding amount. But the same was not
2013:DHC:8038 \ paid. By legal notice dated 5^ September,2011 the petitioner called upon the respondent to refer the matter for adjudication of the disputes but iio reply was received by the petitioner. The petitioner had no option but to refer the! dispute for arbitration. By letter dated 4^'^ November, 2011, the petitioner suggested the name of Ms.Poonam Kalia, Advocate as an
Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. However,the same wasrec^ved back with the remarks"Refused",implying thatthe respondent has failed to appoint the arbitrator within the stipulated time. Hence, the presentpetitionhasbeenfiled.
There is an arbitration clause,i.e.. Clause 8,in agreement dated 16**^
April,2011 which reads as under:
"8.Thatin case on any dispute or differences,which may
I arise between the parties to this agreement with regard to
; the interpretation meaning, constmction or violation of
! any terms and condition ofthis agreement then the same j will be referred/decided by the sole arbitrator to be i mutually appointed by both the parties whose decision shall be binding upon both the parties. The arbitration proceedings shall be conducted at Delhi as per
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or as per amended provisions."
I
From the aforesaid, it is clear that a binding arbitration agreement is in existbnce between the parties and the clahns appear to be live from the
I correspondence placed on record. Since the respondenthas failed to appornt an arbitr'ator within stipulated time, the present petition is allowed. i
Ms.Poonam Kalia, Advocate (Mob.No.9818131567) is appointed as sole i
Arhitrator to adjudicate all the disputes and differences between the parties arising Iout ofthe agreement dated 16^'^ April, 2011. The Arbitrator shall i J s conduct ithe proceedings under the provisions of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 and shall give prior notice before commencing the proceedings. Total fee ofthe learned Arbitmtor shall be payable to the tune of?60,000/- which shall be borne by both the parties in equal proportion.
The petition is accordingly disposed of.
A jcopy of the order be communicated to the sole Aibitrator for infoimatipn and also to both parties.
YYvw^ ^ ( MANMOHAN SBVGH,J.
FEBRUARY 12,2013/jk
! Through None.
GORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH Respondent A
12.02.2013 Respondent has been served. No one is present on behalf of the
I respondent.
The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11 i
(6)ofthe Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment ofa sole arbitrator.
! The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is engaged in the business of electric media production, repurposing services and providing different types ofcontent in various fonnats and medium. It is stated in the petition thatthe petitioner entered into an agreement dated 16'*^ April,2011 i with respondent to produce monthly magazine in English language for the responident. It is further stated in the petition that an amount of
?19,30j,250/-including servicetax,startingfrom April,2011 to September, 2011 was due from the respondent. The petitioner requested the respondent to mahe the payments ofthe outstanding amount. But the same was not
2013:DHC:8038 \ paid. By legal notice dated 5^ September,2011 the petitioner called upon the respondent to refer the matter for adjudication of the disputes but iio reply was received by the petitioner. The petitioner had no option but to refer the! dispute for arbitration. By letter dated 4^'^ November, 2011, the petitioner suggested the name of Ms.Poonam Kalia, Advocate as an
Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. However,the same wasrec^ved back with the remarks"Refused",implying thatthe respondent has failed to appoint the arbitrator within the stipulated time. Hence, the presentpetitionhasbeenfiled.
There is an arbitration clause,i.e.. Clause 8,in agreement dated 16**^
April,2011 which reads as under:
"8.Thatin case on any dispute or differences,which may
I arise between the parties to this agreement with regard to
; the interpretation meaning, constmction or violation of
! any terms and condition ofthis agreement then the same j will be referred/decided by the sole arbitrator to be i mutually appointed by both the parties whose decision shall be binding upon both the parties. The arbitration proceedings shall be conducted at Delhi as per
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or as per amended provisions."
I
From the aforesaid, it is clear that a binding arbitration agreement is in existbnce between the parties and the clahns appear to be live from the
I correspondence placed on record. Since the respondenthas failed to appornt an arbitr'ator within stipulated time, the present petition is allowed. i
Ms.Poonam Kalia, Advocate (Mob.No.9818131567) is appointed as sole i
Arhitrator to adjudicate all the disputes and differences between the parties arising Iout ofthe agreement dated 16^'^ April, 2011. The Arbitrator shall i J s conduct ithe proceedings under the provisions of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 and shall give prior notice before commencing the proceedings. Total fee ofthe learned Arbitmtor shall be payable to the tune of?60,000/- which shall be borne by both the parties in equal proportion.
The petition is accordingly disposed of.
A jcopy of the order be communicated to the sole Aibitrator for infoimatipn and also to both parties.
YYvw^ ^ ( MANMOHAN SBVGH,J.
FEBRUARY 12,2013/jk
JUDGMENT