IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION

COMM. ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 224 OF 2021

A. S. Clearing and Forwarding (India) Pvt. Ltd.

…. Applicant

Versus

APM Terminals India Pvt. Ltd.

…. Respondent

….

Mr. Sidd Panicha with Vanshika Rai i/b Mansi Patel for the Applicant.

Mr. Tarang Kulkarni, Legal Counsel/P.O.A. holder Respondent

Company is present.

….

CORAM:- B.P. COLABAWALLA, J.

DATE : NOVEMBER 25, 2021.

P.C.:

1.

The above Arbitration Application is filed under Section

11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short “the

Arbitration Act”) seeking the constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal to

decide the disputes and differences between the Applicant and the

Respondent arising out the Inland Services Agreement (for short

“ISA”) dated 25^th May, 2018.

1

LAXMI

SUBHASH

SONTAKKE

Digitally

signed by

LAXMI

SUBHASH

SONTAKKE

Date:

2021.11.29

16:12:01

+0530

2.

The arbitration agreement between the parties can be

found at clause 10 of the said ISA which reads thus:

“10. Arbitration and Law & Jurisdiction

10.1This Agreement shall be governed by and

construed in accordance with the laws of India.

10.2In the event of any disputes, differences or

claims arising between the Parties in connection

with this Agreement, during its subsistence

or/and after its termination in any manner

whatsoever, including the validity or the

construction or interpretation of any of the

clauses hereof or anything done or omitted to be

done pursuant hereto, the same shall be referred

and resolved through arbitration in accordance

with the provisions of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act, 1996 or any re-enactment or

modification thereof;

10.3 The Arbitral Tribunal shall comprise of three

Arbitrators, each Party shall be entitled to

appoint one Arbitrator each, who in turn will

then appoint the third Arbitrator who shall

preside as chairman.

10.4 The decision of the Arbitral Tribunal thereon

shall be final, conclusive, and binding on both

the parties to the Agreement.

10.5 The venue of such arbitration proceedings shall

be in Mumbai and the proceedings shall be in

English. The arbitration shall be conducted in

accordance with the substantive and procedural

laws of India.

10.6 Subject to the provisions of the preceding clause

relating to arbitration, the civil courts in

Mumbai shall have exclusive jurisdiction to deal

with all issues arising under this agreement”

2

3.

Mr. Tarang Kulkarni has appeared on behalf of the

Respondent. He has stated that he is in the employment of the

Respondent Company as a Legal Counsel and has the Authority to

appear on their behalf as per the Power of Attorney dated 16^th August,

2021. He also tendered a copy of the said Power of Attorney. The same

is taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification.

4.

Mr. Kurkarni has has fairly stated that Respondent does

not dispute the existence and validity of the arbitration agreement

reproduced earlier. He further submitted that the arbitration clause

contemplates the constitution of a three member tribunal where as he

would suggest that the disputes and differences be decided by a Sole

Arbitrator.

5.

The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the

Applicant also joined in the said request and agreed that the disputes

and differences between the Applicant and the Respondent be decided

by a Sole Arbitrator rather than a three member tribunal.

6.

In view of the aforesaid stand of the parties the following

order is passed:

a) By consent, Ms H. V. Tamanna, an Advocate of this Court, is

appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to decide the disputes and

3

differences between the Petitioner and the Respondent arising

out of and/or in connection with and/or in relation to the

Inland Services Agreement dated 25^th May, 2018.

b) A copy of this order shall be communicated