Indu Bala v. Idea Cellular Ltd

110064. The petitioner had let out to the respondent company the space admeasuring approximately 800 sq.ft. being the portion oftenace and roof (• area ofthe said premises by an agreement dated 10^'^ Febmaiy,2003. The respondent company presently paying a sum of?8,651.50/- per month and ?3327.50/- per month as maintenance charges to petitioner. As the petitioner did not wish to continue the respondent company's tenancy, therefore, the said tenancy of the respondent was terminated by the petitioner by notice dated ifi'^ November, 2011. Since the respondent company has not handed over the vacant and peaceful possession of the premises to the petitioner as called upon in the notice dated 1 November, 2013:DHC:8023 2012, therefore, a dispute has arisen between the parties in relation to the rights and obligations ofthe parties in respect ofthe agreement dated 10^'' February, 2003. Since the agreement dated 10*'' Febmary,2003 contained the arbitration clause,the petitionerin the notice dated 11*''November,2011 had proposed and nominated the name ofSh.Sunil Dalai, Advocate in tenns ofClause 24 ofthe arbitration clause,and therespondentwas called upon to suggestand nominatethe nameofthe respondent's arbitrator within 30 days ofreceipt ofarbitration notice. No name was suggested bythe respondent. Since there is an arbitration clause in the agreement dated 10*'' Februaiy, 2003,therefore,the present petition has been filed. The learned counsel appearing on behalfofthe petitioner submitsthat since it is a small dispute between the parties, instead ofconstituting three members for Arbitral Tribunal, sole arbitrator be appointed. She is agreeable if any Advocate be appointed as sole Arbitrator in the matter to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. No one appears on behalfofthe respondent even on second call. The reply has also not been filed. The respondent's counsel last time took the tune to take instructions from his client with regard to prayer made uithe petition. From the aforesaid, it is clear that a binding arbitration agreement is in existence between the parties. Since the respondent has failed to appoint an arbitrator within stipulated time and in view ofthe submissions made by thelearned counsel appearing on behalfofthe petitioner,the present petition is allowed. Considering the overall facts and circumstances, as agreed, Ms. Maninder Acharya, Advocate (Mobile No.9810163078/9810236189) is appointed as a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate all the disputes and differences between the parties arising out ofthe agreement dated 10^'^ February,2003. The Arbitrator shall conduct the proceedings under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and shall give prior notice before commencing the proceedings. Total fee ofthe leamed Arbitrator is fixed ^60,000/- which shall be shared by both the parties in equalproportion. The petition is accordingly disposed of. Dasti to the parties. A copy ofthe order be also sentto the leamed sole Arbitmtor. j^NMOHAN SINGH,J.