ORDER

% 19.03.2024

1. These are petitions seeking appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the petitioner and the respondents.

2. It is stated by the learned counsel for the respondents that he does not wish to file a reply and his application being an application under Order VII Rule 11 be read as a reply to the petition.

3. In the present case, the petitioner entered into a franchise and The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/03/2024 at 15:55:29

consultancy agreement with the respondent on 01.09.2018.

4. The obligations of the franchise i.e., the respondent are contained in clause 4.1 to 4.4 and 4.11 which read as under:

“4.1

Franchise will leverage its relationships to help organize Internet Service in designated Service Area for provisioning Internet and related services during the term of this Agreement.

Franchise shall be responsible for marketing, promotions, sales and distribution of the service to the ultimate subscribers and/or customers of Internet Services in Service Area.

the Value Added Services along with Internet Services.

information as required by Service Provider for Service Provider’s use or submission of information to the concerned Govt.

Departments including various ministries in time as per the License Agreement entered into with Government of India, Ministry of Communication & IT, and Department of Communication (DOT) and also to Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI).

facilitate or distribute the data and internet Services in any other mode other than the service provider’s plans.”

5. The arbitration clause is contained in clause 12 of the said agreement which reads as under:

“12. ARBITRATION & GOVERNING LAW If any dispute arises between the Parties during the subsistence of this AGREEMENT or thereafter, in connection with the validity, interpretation, implementation or alleged breach of any provisions of this AGREEMENT, the dispute shall be referred to a Sole Arbitrator, to be chosen solely by the Service Provider, for Arbitration by the Parties under the Indian Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 or any of its statutory modifications, The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/03/2024 at 15:55:29

amendments or enactments thereof, and the same shall govern the arbitration proceedings. The arbitration proceedings shall be in English language and the venue of arbitration shall be Delhi. The award granted by the Arbitrator shall be binding on the Parties.”

6. Since there were disputes between the parties, the petitioner invoked arbitration vide legal notice dated 18.01.2022. Since the disputes were pending, the present petition has been filed.

7. Learned counsel for the respondent states that there is no arbitral disputes between the parties. He states that in view of Section 14 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) Act, 1997 and Section 15 of the Act, it is the TDSAT which will be the authority to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

8. The learned counsel relies on the judgment of this Court in “Gaur Distributors vs. Hathway Cable & Datacom Ltd.” [ARB.P. 129/2016].

9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

10. Section 14 and Section 14(A) of the TRAI Act reads as under:

“14. Establishment of Appellate Tribunal.- The Central Government shall, by notification, establish an Appellate Tribunal to be known as the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal to- (a) Adjudicate any dispute— (i) Between a licensor and a licensee;

(ii) Between two or more service providers;

(iii) Between a service provider and a group of consumers.

Section 14A: Application for settlement of disputes and appeals to Appellate Tribunal.- (1)The Central Government or a State Government or a local authority or any person may make an application to the Appellate Tribunal for adjudication of any dispute referred to in clause (a)of Section 14.

........” The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 23/03/2024 at 15:55:29

11. A perusal of t