Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
ARB.P. 351/2023
M/S BK STRUCTURAL CONTRACTS PVT LTD ...Petitioner
Through: Mr. Kushagra Bansal, Adv.
Through: Mr. Shivam Bedi and Mr. Sahil Dhawan, Advs.
30.08.2024
JUDGMENT
1. This is a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996[1], seeking reference of the dispute between the parties to arbitration.
2. The dispute arises in the context of a Work Order dated 20 July 2020, executed between the petitioner and the respondent. The Work Order envisages resolution of the disputes by arbitration and the relevant clause in that regard reads thus:
“the 1996 Act”, hereinafter adjudicated by the Sole Arbitrator who shall be appointed mutually by both the parties within 30 days of the notice of arbitration. The seat, or legal place, of arbitration shall be New Delhi.” (Emphasis supplied)
3. The petitioner addressed a notice to the respondent under Section 21 of the 1996 Act on 29 December 2022, seeking reference of the disputes between the parties to arbitration.
4. The only objection that Mr. Shivam Bedi, learned Counsel for the respondent raises is that in one of the invoices raised by the petitioner, courts at Gurugram were conferred with exclusive jurisdiction.
5. That can make no different to the present petition, as the arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties clearly envisages the seat and venue of arbitration as being Delhi.
6. No other objection has been raised.
7. Accordingly, this court appoints Ms. Usha Nandini V. (Mob:
9958179520) as the arbitrator to arbitrate on the dispute between the parties.
8. The learned arbitrator shall be entitled to charge fees as per the Fourth schedule of the 1996 Act.
9. The learned arbitrator is also requested to file requisite disclosure under Section 12(2) of the 1996 Act within a week of entering on the reference.
10. All questions of fact and law are left open to be agitated before the learned arbitrator.
11. The petition stands allowed in the aforesaid terms.