Order :

MUKESH RAJPUROHIT, J.

1. All the above four arbitration applications shall stand decided by this common order as the parties involved are same.

2. The present applications have been filed by the applicant - M/s Ultratech Cement Limited under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short “Act of 1996” hereinafter) seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator for adjudication of disputes arising out of four different Carrying and Forwarding (C&F) Agreements dated 01.04.2024 executed between the parties for the depots located at Meerut, Noida, Ghaziabad and Moradabad, respectively.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant, UltraTech Cement Ltd. (Unit: Birla White), is one of the leading manufacturers of white cement and allied products in India and operates under the brand name “Birla White”. For the purpose of warehousing and distribution of its products in the State of Uttar Pradesh, the applicant had appointed the respondent-firm, M/s Tirupati Enterprises, as its Carrying and Forwarding (C & F) Agent for depots located at Ghaziabad, Noida, Meerut and Moradabad. Separate agreements were executed for each location on 01.04.2024 appointing the respondent as the C&F Agent.

5. It is submitted that under the terms of the said agreement, the respondent was responsible for handling, storage, inventory maintenance, dispatch of goods and maintaining accurate stock records in accordance with the contractual terms.

6. Learned counsel further submits that during the course of operations, serious discrepancies were noticed between the physical stock and the stock recorded in the SAP system, indicating shortfall and possible mismanagement of depot operations. Despite several meetings and communications, the respondent failed to rectify the discrepancies. Consequently, the applicant issued a termination notice dated 01.05.2025 under Clause 8.3 of the Agreement, terminating the engagement of the respondent for all the four depots. Thereafter, a 48-hour compliance notice was issued calling upon the respondent to hand over peaceful possession of the depots and comply with post-termination obligations including joint stock verification.

7. It is further submitted that possession of the depots was eventually handed over in May 2025 and physical stock verification was carried out in the presence of representatives of both parties. However, the respondent refused to countersign the SAP stock reconciliation records. Subsequently, the applicant issued a Final Shortfall Notice dated 29.05.2025 quantifying the total stock shortfall and calling upon the respondent to deposit the recoverable amount within seven days.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that despite receipt of the said notice, the respondent neither deposited the amount nor gave any satisfactory response. Consequently, the applicant invoked the arbitration clause contained in Clause 10 of the Agreement by issuing a notice dated 25.06.2025 under Section 21 of the Act of 1996 and proposed the name of Shri Vivek Shrimali, Advocate, as the sole arbitrator.

9. It is submitted that the respondent sent a reply dated 19.07.2025 to the shortfall notice denying the alleged shortfall and alleging wrongful termination of the agreement. Thereafter, a reply dated 20.07.2025 was also sent in response to the notice under Section 21 of the Act whereby the respondent rejected the proposed arbitrator but failed to suggest any alternative name. According to the applicant, the conduct of the respondent has resulted in failure of the agreed procedure for appointment of an arbitrator. He, therefore, prays for appointment of arbitrator by this Court while invoking Section 11 of the Act of 1996.

10. During the pendency of the present applications, respondent No. 4 – Smt. Shalini Goel filed an application under Order I Rule 10(2) of the Code (in S.B. Arbitration Application No. 64/2025) seeking her deletion from the array of