R.D.DHANUKA
Shane Duff – Appellant
Versus
Essel Sports Private Limited – Respondent
1. By these petitions filed under section 11 and section 15(2) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short hereinafter referred to as Act) the applicants seek an order and direction to substitute the sole arbitrator. The facts of all the aforesaid mattes are identical and the issue involved being common, all the above matters were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.
2. Both the parties have addressed this court on the basis of the facts in Arbitration (L) No. 49 of 2013 and the same are therefore, summarized as under:
(a) The applicant is engaged in providing physiotherapy, physical fitness/health services etc. for sports items in tournaments/camps. etc. On 23rd January, 2008 the parties entered into ICL Professional Services Agreement (for short referred to as “Agreement”). The agreement was valid for the period of three years. According to applicant, sum of US $ 26,2904 is outstanding and payable by the respondent to the applicant. On 20th October, 2011, the applicant filed Company Petition (13 of 2012) under section 434 of the Companies Act, 1956 in this court against the respondent for winding up. By an order dated 29th June, 2012, t
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.