Full Text
ARB.P. 113/2016, LA. Nos.2401/2016 & 2402/2016
C. L. NAIDU LITTER FLOWER Petitioner
Through Mr.Y.Rajagopala Rao, Adv. with Mr.Hitendra Nath Rath, Adv.
Through None
19.02.2016 I cannot hear this matter. List the same before another Bench on 25^
February, 2016, subject to orders of Hon'ble the Judge Incharge (Original
Side).
}G%J.
J FEBRUARY19,2016/ka $-2
C. L. NAIDU LITTER FLOWER Petitioner
Through: Mr. Y. Raja Gopal Rao, Adv. with Mr. Manoj K. Jain. Adv.
^ Through:
Exemption allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Application stands disposed of.
ARB.?. 113/2016 & lA 2401/2016 'Respondent ./i
T
This is a petition filed underSection 11 and 12(3) of the Arbitration &
Conciliation Act, 1996. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitionerthat the appointment of an Arbitrator made by the respondents is not in terms of clause 9.1 of the Agreement between the parties. He has drawn my attention to page 7 of the documents. According to him, the acceptable Sole Arbitrator was necessarily to be appointed by the respondents, which inthis case, the respondents have failed to do, inasmuch as the respondents without notice to the petitioner had appointed an
Arbitrator. He also relies upon the order dated November 3,2015 passed by this Court in Arbitration Petition No.441/2015 in similar circumstances.
Issue notice to the respondents returnable before the Court on 1^^
April, 2016, FEBRUARY 25,2016/ak V. KAMESW^ RAO, J
I
$-5 to 9
ORDER
(6) ARB.P. 107/2016, lA 2235-2236/2016 (7) ARB.P. 108/2016, lA 2237-2238/2016 (8) ARB.P. 109/2016, lA 2239-2240/2016 MINERVA PUBLIC SCHOOL Petitioner Through: Mr.Y.Rajagopala Rao, Adv.
VERSUS
C. L. NAIDU LITTER FLOWER Petitioner
VERSUS
JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO ORDER % 01.04.2016 Mr. Ashutosh Kumar, learned eounsel appears for the respondents and seeks and allowed three weeks to file reply. Rejoinder within two weeks, thereafter. Renotify on July 14, 2016. Learned counsel for the respondents states that the respondents shall request the learned Arbitrator, to defer the date of hearing in the V arbitration proceedings to a date beyond July 14, 2016. The statement is taken on reeord.
APRIL 01, 2016 RN 0^
V. KAMESWAR BIAO, J
A $-5 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 441/2015 & I.A. No.16084/2015 SAVITRI DEVI MEMORIAL INTERNATIONAL SCHOOL THROUGH: ITS PRESIDENT Petitioner Through: Mr. Sudesh Goyal, Advocate.
VERSUS
EDU SMART SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED TH ITSAUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE & ANR... Respondents Through: Mr. R. Narayanan, Advocate for R[2]. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.
JUSTICE J.R. MIDHA % ORDER 03.11.2015 ARB.?. 441/2015 & I.A. No.16084/2015
1. Learned counsel for the respondents submits on instructions that the respondents have no objection to the termination of the arbitrator appointed by them since the respondents- had not sought the concurrence of the petitioner. Leamed counsel for the respondents further submits that the respondents have no objection to the appointment of an independent arbitrator by this Court. With the consent of both the parties, the appointment of the arbitrator appointed by respondents is hereby terminated.
2. The petition is allowed and Ms. Vibha Mahajan Seth, Advocate, Mobile No.9810702410 is appointed as sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties including their claims and counter-claims. The arbitration shall take place under the aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre ('DAC').
3. The Delhi International Arbitration Centre shall ensure the "(ii'liljlih-'' compliance of the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015 dated 23'"^ October, 2015.
4. Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the petitioner under the signature of the Court Master. A copy of this order be delivered to the learned Arbitrator as well as Additional Coordinator, DAC forthwith.
5. The pending application is disposed of.
NOVEMBER 03,2015 ak J.R. MIDHA, J.