(August 10, 2001) 2001 (TLS)126505

2001-AD (Del)-7-270

JAI SINGH Vs. Delhi Development Authority

VIJENDER JAIN

( 1 ) IT is petition for direction inter alia that the mandate of the Arbitrator appointed by respondent no. 2 be terminated. It has been contended by counsel for the petitioner that the arbitrator was designated by post and this Court in OMP 152/1998 in similar circumstances, revoked the authority of the Arbitrator designated by post.

( 2 ) IT has also been contended that the Arbitrator was at the first instance appointed on 6/05/1996. That Arbitrator who was Superintending Engineer of the respondent was transferred and again in June, 1997 Mr. R. B. Malhotra was appointed as Arbitrator. He also continued for another year and thereafter in June, 1998 Mr. N. K. Sharma was appointed as arbitrator.

( 3 ) IT has been contended before me by learned counsel for the petitioner that such frequent change of Arbitrator delays arbitration proceedings as well as same is not conducive to the proceedings. New Arbitrator will not be in a position to evaluate and judge the arguments advanced before the previous Arbitrator.

( 4 ) ON the other hand, counsel for the respondent has contended that after the appointment of Sh. N. K. Sharma, no other Arbitrator has been appointed. It is further contended that the claimant/ Petitioner has participated In the proceedings. It is further contended that all the claims and counter claims and arguments have been advanced and the matter is only fixed for pronouncement of the Award. She has further contended that it will be borne out from the letters written by the Claimant to the Arbitrator that the Claimant was appearing before the arbitrator till 27/1/2000. The Arbitrator in his order dated 27/1/2000 has recorded that "the respondents stated that so far as the claims are concerned, all the claims of the claimants have been discussed and concluded. Written arguments have already been submitted by the respondent and nothing more is to be added.

( 5 ) THE claimants stated as under:-

"as far as the Claimant s are concerned, the claimants have presented all their claims and also file their written arguments. "

( 6 ) ON the basis of the aforesaid order, the learned counsel for the respondent has contended that the present application is simply an after thought and same is not maintainable.

( 7 ) I have given my careful considerations to arguments advanced on behalf of counsel for the parties.

( 8 ) AS far as appointment of the Arbitrator by post is concerned, the view taken by this court in the aforesaid case OMP No. 152/1998 and the proposition of law cannot be disputed. However, in the case before hand, after the petitioner has participated in the arbitration proceedings, all his claims have been agitated before the Arbitrator, records have been perused by the Arbitrator in support of the claims of the parties, written arguments have been submitted by the petitioner before the Arbitrator, it Is too late for the petitioner to approach this Court for termination of the authority of the Arbitrator. The present Arbitrator has been continuing since June, 1998. Ms. Salwan says that Mr. N. K. Sharma, the Arbitrator shall not be changed till he makes the Award in view of the participation in the proceedings before the Arbitrator and the arbitration proceedings at the last stage, I do no see any justification to terminate the authority of the Arbitrator by appointing a new Arbitrator or by supplying a vacancy by this court. There is no merit in the petition.

( 9 ) HOWEVER, a direction is issued to the Arbitrator to give a final hearing to the parties before making the Award.

( 10 ) WITH the above observations, the petition stands disposed of.

--- *** ---

.