Full Text
Translation output
! ,2, {r-'
3.
* COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
IN THE HIGH
ARB.P.92l20r7
PURNANAND ..... Petitioner
Ms. Alka Srivastava, Advocate.
?r
Through:
3.
* COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
IN THE HIGH
ARB.P.92l20r7
PURNANAND ..... Petitioner
Ms. Alka Srivastava, Advocate.
?r
Through:
VERSUS
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHI
AND ANOTHER .'... ResPondents
Through: Ms. Mini Pushkarna, Advocate.
AND ANOTHER .'... ResPondents
Through: Ms. Mini Pushkarna, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI o/o L4.O9.2OLL
Despite opportunity, no reply has been filed'
This petition has been preferred to seek the appointment of a
Sole Arbitrator in terms of Clause 25 of the terms & conditions of contract between the parties, which is contained in the work order dated 07.LO.2OO4. The petitioner raised its claims, inter alia, vide a letter dated 07.12.2009 and also sought the appointment of an
Arbitrator'by the Commissioner, MCD. However, the Commissioner, MCD, has not appointed the Arbitrator, Yet another notice was sent on
05.02.2010 and again on 05.10.2010 for the same purpose, however, the Arbitrator has not been appointed.
From the aforesaid, it is clear that the parties entered into a contract contained in the work order dated 07.10.2004, which contains an arbitration agreement. The claims raised by the petitioner
1b
2011:DHC:6788
. .; l:> ' q to be stemmed out of the said contract and are, therefore, liable adjudicated under the arbitration agreement.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed. I appoint Ms. Justice Sharda
Agarwal, retired Judge of this Court, as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. lt shall be open to the petitioner to raise all its objections and counter-claims before the learned Arbitrator.
It is agreed that the fees of the learned Arbitrator shall be paid in a accordance with the Schedule of Fees prescribed under the Rules of the Delhi High Court Arbitration Centre.
A copy of this order be communicated to the learned Arbitrator.
The petition stands disposed of. i5 vtPtN sANGHt, J
SEPTEMBER L4,?OLL'
,BSR'
2011:DHC:6788
Despite opportunity, no reply has been filed'
This petition has been preferred to seek the appointment of a
Sole Arbitrator in terms of Clause 25 of the terms & conditions of contract between the parties, which is contained in the work order dated 07.LO.2OO4. The petitioner raised its claims, inter alia, vide a letter dated 07.12.2009 and also sought the appointment of an
Arbitrator'by the Commissioner, MCD. However, the Commissioner, MCD, has not appointed the Arbitrator, Yet another notice was sent on
05.02.2010 and again on 05.10.2010 for the same purpose, however, the Arbitrator has not been appointed.
From the aforesaid, it is clear that the parties entered into a contract contained in the work order dated 07.10.2004, which contains an arbitration agreement. The claims raised by the petitioner
1b
2011:DHC:6788
. .; l:> ' q to be stemmed out of the said contract and are, therefore, liable adjudicated under the arbitration agreement.
Accordingly, this petition is allowed. I appoint Ms. Justice Sharda
Agarwal, retired Judge of this Court, as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. lt shall be open to the petitioner to raise all its objections and counter-claims before the learned Arbitrator.
It is agreed that the fees of the learned Arbitrator shall be paid in a accordance with the Schedule of Fees prescribed under the Rules of the Delhi High Court Arbitration Centre.
A copy of this order be communicated to the learned Arbitrator.
The petition stands disposed of. i5 vtPtN sANGHt, J
SEPTEMBER L4,?OLL'
,BSR'
2011:DHC:6788
JUDGMENT