The petitioner must first seek termination of the existing Arbitrator's mandate through the appropriate civil court before requesting a new Arbitrator, as the existing proceedings had commenced.

ORDER :

1. Instant arbitration application under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short "A&C Act") has been filed by the petitioner, praying to annul the appointment of sole Arbitrator Mr. Sanjeev Singhvi, appointed by the respondent and to appoint a neutral and impartial Arbitrator to adjudicate the claims of petitioner.

2. Heard learned counsel for both parties and perused the record.

3. It appears from the record that four Master Rate Contract Agreements (for short “the Master Agreements”) in the year 2009-10 were entered into and executed between the petitioner and respondent whereby and whereunder petitioner agreed with the respondent to provide comprehensive maintenance and operation under BSNL, Electrical Division Udaipur and Kota of Rajasthan Telecom Circle and on raising a dispute by the petitioner, sole Arbitrator Mr. Sanjeev Singhvi was appointed by the respondent, following the procedure of appointment of Arbitrator envisaged under Clause 25 of BSNL Master Rate Contract Agreements. The first hearing of arbitration proceedings before the sole Arbitrator of Mr. Sanjeev Singhvi took place on 03.12.2012 which has been placed on record by the respondent with reply to the arbitration application as Annexure-R/2. A perusal of proceedings dated 03.12.2012 goes to show that petitioner accepted the appointment of Mr. Sanjeev Singhvi as a sole Arbitrator and submitted to his jurisdiction by participating in the arbitration proceedings for adjudication of its claims.

4. It appears that during the ongoing proceedings of arbitration before the sole Arbitrator Mr. Sanjeev Singhvi, petitioner raised some additional dispute/ claim through letter dated 18.11.2014 and requested the respondent to appoint Arbitrator, whereupon the respondent proposed to appoint new Arbitrator but petitioner through its letter dated 20.02.2015, requested the respondent to refer the additional dispute/ claim to the erstwhile appointed Arbitrator Mr. Sanjeev Singhvi and prayed to publish award immediately. The copy of the letter dated 20.02.2015 written by and on behalf of petitioner to the Chief Engineer (E) BSNL Electrical Zone has been placed on record by the respondent with reply as Annexure-R/3.It is noteworthy that in furtherance to the request of petitioner vide letter dated 18.11.2014, for appointment of Arbitrator, respondent appointed Mr. Tulsi Kumar Parihar as sole Arbitrator but he resigned to act as Arbitrator and appointed Mr. Sanjeev Singhvi as sole Arbitrator exercising his jurisdiction as Chief Engineer (E) BSNL, Jaipur as per Clause 25 of the Master Agreement. Thus, for deciding the additional claim/ dispute of petitioner, Mr. Sanjeev Singhvi was appointed as sole Arbitrator under order dated 16.03.2015 with whom the original claim of petitioner was already subjudice. Respondent had also made counter claim.

5. It has further transpired from the record as also undisputed fact that as many as 11 hearings have taken place before the Arbitrator Mr. Sanjeev Singhvi and according to petitioner, last hearing took place on 24.08.2016, thereafter no proceedings have taken place. The last procedural order dated 24.08.2016 passed by the Arbitrator, concluding the 11^th hearing of arbitration proceedings has been placed on record by the petitioner as Annexure-5 with the arbitration application.From bare perusal of the proceedings of arbitration, drawn in the 11^th hearing dated 24.08.2016 (Ann.5), it appears that the deliberations took place on 10 issues indicated therein and the proceedings culminated with observation that “the next date of hearing will be fixed after confirmation of desired requirements as per these minutes”.

6. It is the case of petitioner that Arbitrator has not conducted any hearing after 24.08.2016 although petitioner itself has pleaded in para No.15 of the arbitration application that thereafter communication dated 12.01.2021 was received from the Arbitrator, asking both the parties to provide specifi