Back
2021 Supreme(Del) 894
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Akash Builders Thru. A.R. - Appellant
Versus
Union Of India Thru Sr.den -works Northern Railway - Respondent
Arbitration Petition No. 40, 41 of 2021, Miscellaneous Application No. 11503, 11504 of 2021
Decided On : 13-09-2021
Important Points
Subject
Arbitration Law - Appointment of Arbitrator
Act Referred
Headnote
Arbitration - Appointment of Arbitrator - The court appointed an arbitrator to arbitrate on the disputes between the parties in accordance with the 1996 Act, leaving all contentions to be urged and contested in the arbitral proceedings.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of an arbitrator to arbitrate on the disputes between the parties.
Finding of the Court:
The court appointed an arbitrator and left all contentions of fact and law, including the arbitrability of the dispute, to be urged and contested in the arbitral proceedings.
Issues: Appointment of arbitrator, reference of disputes to arbitration, and contentions to be urged in the arbitral proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court appointed an arbitrator and allowed all contentions of fact and law, including the arbitrability of the dispute, to be urged and contested in the arbitral proceedings.
Final Decision: The disputes between the parties stand referred to the appointed arbitrator for arbitration, and the petition stands disposed of.
Amit Dubey, Advocate, JK Singh, Advocate, Amit Kumar, Advocate
JUDGMENT
C. Hari Shankar, J. - This is a petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("the 1996 Act" in short), for appointment of an arbitrator, to arbitrate on the disputes between the parties.
2. Though Mr. Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent, had initially opposed the reference of disputes to arbitration, on the last date of hearing, i.e. on 9th September, 2021, however, in view of the order passed in ABC Experts & Engineers v Union of India MANU/DE/1700/2021, he agreed to a reference of disputes to arbitration, leaving open, all contentions that his client might seek to urge in its support in the arbitral proceedings.
3. Mr. Singh, has, thereafter, placed on record, the list of arbitrators maintained by the respondent, out of which, Mr. Dubey, learned Counsel for the petitioner had, on instructions, agreed to select the arbitrator to arbitrate on the various disputes.
4. Mr. Dubey has, thereafter, on instructions, agreed to arbitration of the disputes in this petition, by Mr. Shahzad Shah, IRAS (Retd.), who figures at Serial No. 52, of the list of arbitrators maintained by the respondent.
5. Accordingly, the disputes between the parties stand referred to Mr. Shahzad Shah, for arbitration.
6. This court does not express any view on the contentions involved in this matter, and all contentions of fact and law including the arbitrability of the dispute shall remain open to be urged and contested by both sides before the learned Arbitrator.
7. The learned Arbitrator would be entitled to fees, in accordance with the Fourth Schedule of the 1996 Act or as otherwise agreed upon between the parties.
8. The learned Arbitrator would furnish the requisite disclosure under Section 12(2) of the 1996 Act, within a week of entering on reference.
9. With the aforesaid directions, this petition stands disposed of.
