Full Text
Translation output
$-6 ^ HIGH COURT OF DELHI
ARB.P.572/2015
M.SUDHARSHAN RAO Petitioner
Through Mr.Arjun Singh, Adv. with Mr.Sridhar Potaraju, Mr.Mukunda
Rao & Mr.Gaichangpou Gangmei, Advs.
ARB.P.572/2015
M.SUDHARSHAN RAO Petitioner
Through Mr.Arjun Singh, Adv. with Mr.Sridhar Potaraju, Mr.Mukunda
Rao & Mr.Gaichangpou Gangmei, Advs.
VERSUS
GAIL(INDIA)LIMITED Respondent ^ Through Mr.Sanjeev Sagar,Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH
10.05.2016 The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section ILofthe
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an Arbitrator.
Certain claims are raised by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent has merely made the submissions on the issue of limitation.
According to him, the claims are barred by time. The contention of the respondent is denied by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However,he has no objection ifthe respondent may raise the said objection before the
Arbitrator.
In view ofthe averments made in the petition as well as the material placed on the record,the prayer made in the petition is allowed. Mr.Prem
Kumar, Retired Addl. District Judge, Delhi (Mobile No.9873176030) is
2016:DHC:8322 appointed as sole Arbitratorto adjudicate the disputes between the parties as mentioned in the present petition. The parties are also allowed to file their respective claims and counter-claims before the Arbitrator. Liberty is granted to the respondentto raise the plea oflimitation before the Arbitrator, however,the same will be decided as per its own merits.
The arbitration shall take place under the aegis ofDelhi International
Arbitration Centre('DAC'). The Arbitrator shall ensure the compliance of the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 before commencing the arbitration. The Arbitrator shall file his affidavit of
"no conflict ofinterest". The fees ofthe learned Arbitrator shall be in terms ofthe schedule under the amended Act. The parties to appear before the
Arbitrator on 25^^May,2016for directions.
The petition is accordingly disposed of.
Copy ofthis order be given dastito the learned counselforthe parties and a copy thereof be delivered to the learned Arbitrator as well as
Additional Coordinator,DAC forthwith.
MAY 10,2016/ka 2016:DHC:8322
10.05.2016 The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section ILofthe
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an Arbitrator.
Certain claims are raised by the petitioner. Learned counsel for the respondent has merely made the submissions on the issue of limitation.
According to him, the claims are barred by time. The contention of the respondent is denied by the learned counsel for the petitioner. However,he has no objection ifthe respondent may raise the said objection before the
Arbitrator.
In view ofthe averments made in the petition as well as the material placed on the record,the prayer made in the petition is allowed. Mr.Prem
Kumar, Retired Addl. District Judge, Delhi (Mobile No.9873176030) is
2016:DHC:8322 appointed as sole Arbitratorto adjudicate the disputes between the parties as mentioned in the present petition. The parties are also allowed to file their respective claims and counter-claims before the Arbitrator. Liberty is granted to the respondentto raise the plea oflimitation before the Arbitrator, however,the same will be decided as per its own merits.
The arbitration shall take place under the aegis ofDelhi International
Arbitration Centre('DAC'). The Arbitrator shall ensure the compliance of the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 before commencing the arbitration. The Arbitrator shall file his affidavit of
"no conflict ofinterest". The fees ofthe learned Arbitrator shall be in terms ofthe schedule under the amended Act. The parties to appear before the
Arbitrator on 25^^May,2016for directions.
The petition is accordingly disposed of.
Copy ofthis order be given dastito the learned counselforthe parties and a copy thereof be delivered to the learned Arbitrator as well as
Additional Coordinator,DAC forthwith.
MAY 10,2016/ka 2016:DHC:8322
JUDGMENT