JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. G.N. Sahewella, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. M. Sahewalla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. R. Goswami, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. The present petition has been filed seeking appointment of an Arbitrator by invoking Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 after the respondents declined to refer the dispute for arbitration in terms of the Compact Insurance Policy No.1310002618P113591521 entered between the parties.

3. The petitioner is a private Limited Company incorporated under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 engaged, amongst others, in the business of running a chain of multi branded Retail Shops across the entire North East India and having several shopping malls.

4. The respondent No.1 is engaged in the business of General Insurance providing general insurance policies including industrial all risk policy.

5. According to the petitioner, the business activities of the petitioner was covered by Insurance policy underwritten by the respondent No.1 effective from 23.01.2017 upto 22.01.2018, which was renewed from time to time by paying requisite premium. According to the petitioner, the said Insurance policy is composite one which includes various policies including Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy, Burglary and House Breaking Policy, Electrical and Mechanical Appliances Policy, Money Insurance Policy, Electronic Equipment Cover, etc.

6. It has been submitted that the petitioner had been paying all the due premiums as per the aforesaid Insurance Policy.

According to the petitioner, while the said Insurance Policy was subsisting, certain persons damaged the property of the petitioner situated at Naharlagun, Arunachal Pradesh for committing burglary. They looted many stocks and money kept inside the shop belonging to the petitioner damaging various fixture and furniture, in connection with which an F.I.R. was lodged. Necessarily, the petitioner informed the respondent No.1 about such a damage and loss caused. Accordingly, a Surveyor was appointed as required by the respondents who assessed the damage to the extent of Rs.6,03,23,851/- against the claim of the petitioner which was to the tune of Rs.12.44 crores only. The petitioner sought settlement of the claim in terms of the Insurance Policy.

However, to the dismay of the petitioner, the petitioner received a letter dated 31.10.2019 issued by the respondent No.1 communicating the petitioner about the cancellation of the Comprehensive Policy of Insurance and informing that as per instruction of the competent authority of the Insurance Company, shops cannot be covered by Compact Policy and accordingly, the Compact Policy has to be cancelled with immediate effect and the premium will be refunded.

7. It is the plea of the petitioner that if the respondents had accepted the premiums, it would indicate that the business activities of the petitioner were covered by the Insurance Policy, otherwise, they would not have accepted the premiums.

Be that as it may, according to the petitioner, the said cancellation was to avoid any payment by the Insurance Company.

In the meantime, Covid-19 Pandemic broke out which compelled the petitioner to agree to a reduced amount of settlement, however, without prejudice to the petitioner’s claim.

8. According to the petitioner, though the petitioner received the reduced amount of Rs.1,82,59,249/-, the petitioner would be entitled to adequate amount in terms of the Insurance Policy.

9. It is submitted that the said Insurance Policy contains an Arbitration clause under Clause 15 of the General Conditions of the Policy which provides for arbitration and accordingly, the petitioner wrote to the authorities to refer the dispute to be adjudicated by an Arbitrator. However, the respondents have declined to do so.

10. Having no other alternative, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing this petition for appointment of an arbitrator under Sect