J U D G M E N T

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.

I.A. 4103/2024 (u/S 5 of Limitation Act, 1963 r/w Section 151 of CPC, 1908)

1. By way of present Application, the applicant/petitioner seeks condonation of 257 days’ delay in re-filing the present petition.

2. For the grounds and reasons stated in the present Application, the Application is allowed. The delay of 257 days in re-filing the present petition is hereby condoned.

3. The Application is disposed of.

ARB.P. 228/2024

4. The present Petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act, 1996”) has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking appointment of a sole Arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes that have arisen between the parties in respect of Partnership Deeds dated 06.06.2021 and 01.01.2022.

5. Briefly stated, the original Proprietor, Shri Ashwini Chaturvedi, the paternal uncle (brother of petitioner’s father) of the petitioner was assigned the Dealership of Indian Oil Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as “IOCL”) Petrol Pump vide Letter of Intent dated 04.06.1991 issued by the Chief Divisional Manager, IOCL, allotting him a Petrol Pump in Kanpur. A fresh Letter of Intent substituting the earlier one, for a Petrol Pump in New Delhi was issued to the original Proprietor, Shri Ashwini Chaturvedi in the year 1995 which subsequently culminated into a Dealership.

6. It is asserted by the Petitioner that the said Dealership got originally assigned to Shri Ashwini Chaturvedi purely at the instance of petitioner’s father, Shri Arvind Chaturvedi. Since the inception, the original Proprietor was always dependent upon the petitioner’s father who not only received the Dealership of the Petrol Pump because of the efforts of the petitioner’s father but was able to run the business solely because of the petitioner’s father’s money and investments. Moreover, the charge of running the Petrol Pump was often left to the petitioner’s father who was instrumental in its success.

7. The petitioner has claimed that since the original Proprietor did not have the requisite finances, he constantly corresponded with IOCL requesting the reconstitution of the Dealership from sole Proprietorship to Partnership between himself and his brother, Shri Arvind Chaturvedi.

8. In September, 1999, the original Proprietor, Shri Ashwini Chaturvedi as well as the father, Shri Arvind Chaturvedi, of the petitioner wrote separate letters to the Chief Divisional Officer, IOCL requesting the permission for conversion of sole Proprietorship into the Partnership.

9. On 29.09.1999, the Petrol/HSD Pump Dealership Agreement (hereinafter referred to as the “Dealership Agreement”) was executed between the original Proprietor and the IOCL, assigning the original Proprietor the Dealership of the Petrol Pump.

10. On 06.06.2021, a Partnership Deed was executed between the petitioner and the original Proprietor and the petitioner became the partner instead of his father. Thereafter, the petitioner and the original Proprietor submitted the Partnership Deed to IOCL along with the Letter dated 07.12.2021 to the Chief Divisional Manager, IOCL requesting him to reconstitute the Dealership in the name of Partnership Firm which was duly acknowledged by IOCL.

11. It is submitted that the physical meetings were held and before the Dealership could be transferred in the name of Partnership Firm, the family decided that the original Proprietor would retire from the business because of his health issues and his son, Sh. Ayush Chaturvedi/the respondent No. 1 herein, would take over the position of his father, the original Proprietor under the Partnership which had been constituted on 06.06.2021.

12. A fresh Partnership Deed dated 01.01.2022 was thus, executed between the petitioner and the respondent No. 1 and the share of original Proprietor was transferred to him, the respondent No. 1 herein.

13. Since the first Reconstitution Application, wherein the petitioner and the original Pr