JUDGMENT

Mohammad Rafiq, J. - This application under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by Smt. Anjana Badera, praying for appointment of independent Arbitrator on behalf of the respondents so that the already appointed Arbitrator on behalf of the petitioner and the Arbitrator so appointed by this court, may constitute a three member arbitration panel by selecting third independent Member/Umpire and praying in alternative that this Court may appoint third independent Member/Umpire in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Further prayer is made that this court may appoint or constitute a single Member arbitral tribunal either consisting of the member suggested by the petitioner or any other independent arbitrator as this court deems fit, to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and the respondents.

2. Facts of the case, as emerging from the pleadings of the parties, are that a partnership firm in the name of M/s. Vishal Farms, was constituted on 23.11.2004 with petitioner Smt. Anjana Badera and respondent Smt. Asha Khandelwal, as partners, for the purpose of agriculture and related activities. The investment and profit & loss sharing between the partners was in the ratio of 40:60, respectively. Both the partners invested the capital in the firm in order to purchase an agriculture land on 03.12.2004 measuring 6.38 hectare from Munni Devi W/o Shri Ramu Mali in the name of the firm. Owing to mistake of nonaddition of land bearing khasra no. 1074 measuring 0.83 hectare in the sale-deed dated 03.12.2004, an amendment was made on 20.12.2004 and same was executed and registered on 20.12.2004. The said property was entered in the revenue records in the name of the Vishal Farms through both the partners, wherein the petitioner had 40% stake. Since accounts of the firm were not being maintained properly, a dispute arose between the partners and the petitioner decided to retire from the firm. As mutually agreed, the petitioner retired with effect from 17.08.2015 and Mr. Om Prakash Khandelwal was inducted as partner. The said retirement was decided to come into effect retrospectively from 17.08.2015 only when the immovable property of the firm was sold within six months and 40% stake of the petitioner was handed over to her or in failure, the property was sold within six months from the proposed date of retirement and the petitioner was paid 40% of market value amount of the property.

3. Mr. Ashok Mehta, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, has tried to justify this stand of the petitioner by submitting that the petitioner, in view of the cordial relations between the parties, agreed to sign the deed, blank pages and other proforma documents, as required by the respondent no. 1. Since market value of the land acquired vide sale deed dated 20.12.2004 was quite high, both the parties agreed to the proposed retirement from 17.08.2015 but subject to the aforesaid condition. As per agreement between the parties, interim settlement of accounts was made in lieu of which a sum of Rs. 14,96,738/- was transferred by the respondents vide R.T.G.S. as per the book value in the account of the petitioner. This settlement was arrived at as per the balance-sheet dated 01.04.2015. Book value of the assets, which was valued at Rs. 6,33,00,000/-, however, actual market value of the land was estimated at Rs. 20-25 crore. The respondents told the petitioner that for the purpose of sale of the property, if sale deed was registered, she would be required to submit a sum equivalent to capital gain and registration expenses, which were calculated at Rs. 30,05,928/-.

4. Learned senior counsel submitted that as per the revenue records, name of the petitioner still exists as co-owner of the disputed property. Even two electricity connections were in the name of the petitioners and respondent no. 2 jointly till May, 2016 and thereafter, name of the petitioner was removed in a clandestine manner from a