Full Text
Translation output
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
ARB.P. 121/2010
SAMAR SINGH
Petitioner
Through: Mr. B.L. Wali, Advocate
ARB.P. 121/2010
SAMAR SINGH
Petitioner
Through: Mr. B.L. Wali, Advocate
VERSUS
Respondent
Through: Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Advocate
Through: Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Advocate
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
ORDER o/o 08.12.2010 No reply has been filed by the respondent despite opportunity. f
Accordingly, I proceed to dispose ofthis petition.
This petition has been preferred under section 11(6)and section
14 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. By this petition, the petitioner seeks the termination of the mandate of the learned arbitrator who is the Vice Chairman of the respondent DDA, and also seeks the appointment of an independent arbitrator.
The parties entered into a license agreement on 23.04.2007.
The petitioner was granted the license in respect of a parking site. The petitioner had certain grievances in relation to the said license. The license deed, an unsigned copy whereof has been placed on record, is
2010:DHC:7495 r an admitted document,inasmuch as Mr. Narula states that the original signed copy is available in the record with the respondent.
Clause 24 of the said license deed provides that in case of any dispute arising between the parties in respect of interpretation or performance of any terms or conditions of the license deed,the same shall be referred to the sole arbitration of the vice chairman of the respondent DDA, whose decision thereon shall be final and binding on the parties.
As the petitioner had certain grievances, the petitioner invoked the arbitration agreement vide communication dated 17.08.2009.
Despite the invocation of the said agreement, the sole arbitrator, namely,the Vice Chairman of DDA has failed to act as no proceedings have been held by him till the date of the filing of the petition, i.e.
28.04.2010 or even thereafter.
The arbitration agreement between the parties has named the arbitrator. The agreement has been invoked by the petitioner.
However, the named arbitrator has failed to act in the matter despite passage of nearly seven months till the date of filing of the petition.
Consequently, there could be no doubt that the mandate of the learned arbitrator stands terminated, as he has failed to act without any undue delay. Accordingly,the mandate ofthe Vice Chairman,DDA as arbitrator stands terminated. f-
/ In view of the fact that there is an arbitration agreement between the parties and the disputes between them have to be resolved through arbitration, I allow this petition and appoint Mr. Babu Lai, retired ADJ as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the claims and counter claims of the parties.
The fee of the learned arbitrator shall be paid as per the schedule of the Delhi High Court Arbitration Centre. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, states that the petitioner is agreeable to the conduct of the arbitration under the Rules of the Delhi
High Court Arbitration Centre. Mr. Narula, however, wishes to take instructions in this regard. He is permitted to do so.
In case the respondent is also agreeable to the conduct of the arbitration under the Rules of the Delhi High Court Arbitration Centre, the parties may sign the joint memorandum and place it on record within two weeks.
A copy of this order be communicated to the learned arbitrator as also to the Delhi High Court Arbitration Centre.
Petition stands disposed of. Dasti.
VIPIN SANGHI,J DECEMBER 08, 2010 r 2.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
SAMAR SINGH Petitioner
Through: Mr. B.L.Wali, Advocate.
ORDER o/o 08.12.2010 No reply has been filed by the respondent despite opportunity. f
Accordingly, I proceed to dispose ofthis petition.
This petition has been preferred under section 11(6)and section
14 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. By this petition, the petitioner seeks the termination of the mandate of the learned arbitrator who is the Vice Chairman of the respondent DDA, and also seeks the appointment of an independent arbitrator.
The parties entered into a license agreement on 23.04.2007.
The petitioner was granted the license in respect of a parking site. The petitioner had certain grievances in relation to the said license. The license deed, an unsigned copy whereof has been placed on record, is
2010:DHC:7495 r an admitted document,inasmuch as Mr. Narula states that the original signed copy is available in the record with the respondent.
Clause 24 of the said license deed provides that in case of any dispute arising between the parties in respect of interpretation or performance of any terms or conditions of the license deed,the same shall be referred to the sole arbitration of the vice chairman of the respondent DDA, whose decision thereon shall be final and binding on the parties.
As the petitioner had certain grievances, the petitioner invoked the arbitration agreement vide communication dated 17.08.2009.
Despite the invocation of the said agreement, the sole arbitrator, namely,the Vice Chairman of DDA has failed to act as no proceedings have been held by him till the date of the filing of the petition, i.e.
28.04.2010 or even thereafter.
The arbitration agreement between the parties has named the arbitrator. The agreement has been invoked by the petitioner.
However, the named arbitrator has failed to act in the matter despite passage of nearly seven months till the date of filing of the petition.
Consequently, there could be no doubt that the mandate of the learned arbitrator stands terminated, as he has failed to act without any undue delay. Accordingly,the mandate ofthe Vice Chairman,DDA as arbitrator stands terminated. f-
/ In view of the fact that there is an arbitration agreement between the parties and the disputes between them have to be resolved through arbitration, I allow this petition and appoint Mr. Babu Lai, retired ADJ as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the claims and counter claims of the parties.
The fee of the learned arbitrator shall be paid as per the schedule of the Delhi High Court Arbitration Centre. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, states that the petitioner is agreeable to the conduct of the arbitration under the Rules of the Delhi
High Court Arbitration Centre. Mr. Narula, however, wishes to take instructions in this regard. He is permitted to do so.
In case the respondent is also agreeable to the conduct of the arbitration under the Rules of the Delhi High Court Arbitration Centre, the parties may sign the joint memorandum and place it on record within two weeks.
A copy of this order be communicated to the learned arbitrator as also to the Delhi High Court Arbitration Centre.
Petition stands disposed of. Dasti.
VIPIN SANGHI,J DECEMBER 08, 2010 r 2.
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
SAMAR SINGH Petitioner
Through: Mr. B.L.Wali, Advocate.
VERSUS
DDA Respondent f Through: Mr.Yash Gandan for Mr. Bhupesh Narula, Advocate.
CORAM:
^ HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI
01.08.2011
01.08.2011
I.A.9708/2011
By this application, the petitioner seeks the appointment of a substitute Arbitrator as the appointee, Mr. Babulal, Retd. ADJ has
»/ expressed his inability to proceed with the matter.
In view of the aforesaid position, the mandate of Mr. Babulal, Retd. ADJ stands terminated. Accordingly, I appoint Mr. S.P. Sabarwal, Retd. ADJ as the substitute Arbitrator. Application stands disposed of.
Dasti.
VIPIN SANGHI,J AUGUST 01,2011 as
■ ./ 1 h. '
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
#21 SAMAR SINGH Petitioner
Through: Mr.B.L. Wali,Advocate.
By this application, the petitioner seeks the appointment of a substitute Arbitrator as the appointee, Mr. Babulal, Retd. ADJ has
»/ expressed his inability to proceed with the matter.
In view of the aforesaid position, the mandate of Mr. Babulal, Retd. ADJ stands terminated. Accordingly, I appoint Mr. S.P. Sabarwal, Retd. ADJ as the substitute Arbitrator. Application stands disposed of.
Dasti.
VIPIN SANGHI,J AUGUST 01,2011 as
■ ./ 1 h. '
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
#21 SAMAR SINGH Petitioner
Through: Mr.B.L. Wali,Advocate.
VERSUS
Respondent
Through: Mr.Bhupesh Narula,Advocate
Through: Mr.Bhupesh Narula,Advocate
CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR
ORDER o/„ 26.03.2012 lA No.5551/2012(bv Petitioner under Sec.15(21 ofthe Arbitration &
Conciliation Act 1996)
Conciliation Act 1996)
ORDER
1. Counselforthe parties have been heard.
2. In place ofShri S.P.Sabharwal,aretired ADJ who has declined to act as an Arbitrator, this Court appoints Mr.Prem Kumar,retired ADJ,r/o 68-B, PocketF,Alaknanda,Gangotri Enclave,New Delhi-19(Mob.9873176030) as Arbitrator. The fees deposited atthe DelhiHigh Court Arbitration Centre (DHCAC)will be made over to Mr.Prem Kumar.The proceedings will be conducted by Mr.Prem Kumar at his office/residence. The DHCAC will send the record to the learned Arbitrator forthwith. }
3. The application is disposed of.
4. Order dasti to the parties. A copy of the order be sent to learned Arbitrator as well as the Co-ordinator,DHCAC.
S.MURALIDHAR,J. MARCH 26,2012 akg