JUDGMENT Shiv Narayan Dhingra, I.-This application/petition has been made by the petitioner under Sections 14/15/23 and 25 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short "the Act") seeking termination of the mandate of the present Arbitrator and for appointment of another Arbitrator in his place. It is stated by the applicant/petitioner that the learned Arbitrator in this case was appointed by this Court on 19th January, 2005, despite passage of more than four years, the respondent has avoided filing of his statement of claim before the learned Arbitrator and the learned Arbitrator continued the proceedings and refused to terminate the proceedings in accordance with Section 25 of the Act resulting into the abuse of the arbitral proceedings by the respondent.

2. The petitioner and the respondent in this case both are Advocates and the dispute between them is in respect of dissolution and accounts of a partnership firm of Advocates. The petitioner submits that the prolonged arbitration proceedings without even filing of the claim by the respondent was paralysing his professional career and the fact that for four years the Arbitrator has not even obtained statement of claim from the respondent, who was claimant before the Arbitrator, was sufficient to terminate the mandate of the Arbitrator.

3. It is submitted that when the proceedings commenced by an order dated 5th February, 2005, the respondent/claimant was directed to file a statement of claim within six weeks. No statement of claim was filed within this period and by an order dated 14th May, 2005, the learned Arbitrator extended time for filing claim by another six weeks from 14th May, 2005. No statement of claim was yet filed and the claimant made an application that he was unable to file his statement of claim in absence of certain records and asked for extension of time. Thereafter, the matter was routinely adjourned from time-to time between 5th May, 2005 and 29th November, 2005 at the request of the respondent/claimant. On 29th November, 2005 the claimant filed an application under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking certain interim directions. The Arbitrator then proceeded with disposal of this application and pleadings in this application were completed on 9th February, 2006. The application was finally argued and on 17th March, 2006, the learned Arbitrator decided this application in favour of the claimant. The petitioner herein preferred an appeal against the order and the same was set aside by this Court by a judgment dated 17th May, 2006 passed in OMP No. 150/2006. Thereafter till date no statement of claim has been filed by the claimant and the proceedings were continuing only on application under Section 17. The applicant/petitioner on 18th January, 2008 filed an application under Sections 12 and 13 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 expressing loss of confidence in the Arbitrator due to above circumstances. This application was dismissed/disposed of vide order dated 21st November, 2008 by the learned Arbitrator.

4. A prayer is made that the mandate of the Arbitrator should be terminated in terms of provisions of Section 14(1)(a) because of failure of the Arbitrator to act without undue delay.

5. The application is opposed by the respondent, who appeared in person, being an Advocate, and stated that he did not want to file reply to the petition and shall straightaway argue the matter. He submitted that there was no delay on his part and it was the petitioner, who was responsible for delay in proceedings before the learned Arbitrator. The petitioner and he were running a partnership firm and in between he had to go abroad. At his back the petitioner did all kinds of misdeeds resulting into loss of his prime clientage. He was unable to file the claim before the Arbitrator because of non-availability of copies of balance-sheet, copies of bank statements, income expenditure accounts for the financial year upto 31st March

Click Here to Read the rest of this document