Back
MADRAS HIGH COURT
Honourable Mr Justice ABDUL QUDDHOSE
Mr.A.Anandhan, S/o. Mr.Arumugam, Proprietor M/s. Sri Ranga Real Estate – Appellant
Versus
S.Hari Kumar, S/o. A. Santha Moorthy – Respondent
Arb O.P/35/2021
ARBITRATION - APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATOR - [SECTION 11(6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996] - ARBITRATION AGREEMENT - SALE AGREEMENT - DISPUTE - APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATOR - COURT ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION - ARBITRATION CLAUSE - LETTERS OF CONSENT - ARBITRATION TRIBUNAL - ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a sole proprietor of a real estate company, entered into separate sale agreements with the respondents for the purchase of plots. The respondents defaulted on the payment of the balance sale consideration. The petitioner issued legal notices to the respondents, calling upon them to take back the advance amount after deducting the expenses incurred by the petitioner. However, no response was received from the respondents. The petitioner approached the court for the appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as there was an arbitration agreement in the form of letters of consent signed by the parties.
Finding of the Court:
The court observed that there was an arbitration agreement as evidenced by the letters of consent signed by the parties. The court noted that the respondents had not disputed the existence of the arbitration agreement. The court further observed that a dispute had arisen between the parties regarding the sale agreements and that the dispute could only be adjudicated by an arbitral tribunal.
Issues: 1. Whether there was a valid arbitration agreement between the parties?2. Whether a dispute had arisen between the parties?3. Whether the court should appoint an arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute?
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that there was a valid arbitration agreement between the parties as evidenced by the letters of consent signed by them. The court further held that a dispute had arisen between the parties regarding the sale agreements and that the dispute could only be adjudicated by an arbitral tribunal. Therefore, the court appointed an arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute.
Final Decision: The court appointed Mr. B. Ramalingam, a retired District Judge, as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
Arb.O.P.Nos.35, 36, 37, 38,39,40, 41, 42 and 43 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.01.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
Arb.Original Petition Nos.35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42 and 43 of
2021
A.Anandhan
... Petitioner in all the original petitions
Versus
S.Hari Kumar
... Respondent in Arb.O.P.No.35 of
2021
G.Renuka
... Respondent in Arb.O.P.No.36 of
2021
B.T.Umapathy
... Respondent in Arb.O.P.No.37 of
2021
G.Rajendran
... Respondent in Arb.O.P.No.38 of
2021
P.Mageshwari
... Respondent in Arb.O.P.No.39 of
2021
M.Natarajan
... Respondent in Arb.O.P.No.40
of 2021
1/15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Arb.O.P.Nos.35, 36, 37, 38,39,40, 41, 42 and 43 of 2021
S.Samuthiraraj
... Respondent in Arb.O.P.No.41 of
2021
S.Ranganathan
... Respondent in Arb.O.P.No.42 of
2021
A.Shanmuga Sundaram
... Respondent in Arb.O.P.No.43 of
2021
Petitions filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to appoint Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate
the differences and disputes between the petitioner and the respondent.
For Petitioner
: Ms.M.Hemasree
For Respondent
: Mr.T.Ramkumar
in Arb.O.P.Nos.
36,37,38,41,42 & 43
COMMON ORDER
All these petitions have been filed under Section 11 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking for appointment of an
Arbitrator.
2/15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Arb.O.P.Nos.35, 36, 37, 38,39,40, 41, 42 and 43 of 2021
2. The respective respondents have entered into separate agreement
of sale with the petitioner, under which, the respective respondents have
agreed to buy a plot from the petitioner, who is the absolute owner.
According to the petitioner, the respective respondents have committed
default in the payment of balance sale consideration. The respective
respondents have also jointly signed letters of consent dated 01.07.2021,
14.06.2021, 01.10.2021, 01.07.2021, 14.06.2021, 05.07.2021,
16.05.2021, 14.06.2021 and 12.06.2021, agreeing to refer the dispute, if
any, arising out of agreement of sale to arbitration.
3. The petitioner has issued separate legal notices dated
04.06.2021, 04.06.2021, 05.05.2021, 05.05.2021, 04.06.2021,
04.06.2021, 04.06.2021, 05.05.2021 and 05.05.2021 calling upon them
to take back the advance amount from the petitioner after deducting the
expenses incurred by the petitioner, for which, no response has been
received by the petitioner from the respective respondents.
3/15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Arb.O.P.Nos.35, 36, 37, 38,39,40, 41, 42 and 43 of 2021
4. Since there is an arbitration agreement as seen from the letters of
consent dated 01.07.2021, 14.06.2021, 01.10.2021, 01.07.2021,
14.06.2021, 05.07.2021, 16.05.2021, 14.06.2021 and 12.06.2021,
entered into by the petitioner with the respective respondents, the
petitioner has approached this Court for appointment of an Arbitrator
under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.. The
details of the date of sale agreement and the date of letters of the consent,
which contain the arbitration agreement entered into by the respective
respondents with the petitioner are detailed hereunder:-
S.No.
Arb.O.P.No.
Date of Agreement
Date of letter of consent agreeing
for Arbitration
1
35 of 2021
25.12.2016
01.07.2021
2
36 of 2021
24.05.2016
14.06.2021
3
37 of 2021
04.04.2016
01.10.2021
4
38 of 2021
29.01.2016
01.07.2021
5
39 of 2021
30.11.2015
14.06.2021
6
40 of 2021
22.09.2017
05.07.2021
7
41 of 2021
20.03.2017
16.05.2021
8
42 of 2021
17.12.2015
14.06.2021
9
43 of 2021
31.05.2015
12.06.2021
5. Heard Ms.Hemasree, learned counsel for the petitioner and
4/15
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Arb.O.P.Nos.35, 36, 37, 38,39,40, 41, 42 and 43 of 2021
Mr.T.Ramkumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents in
Ar.O.P.Nos.36, 37, 38, 41, 42 & 43.
6. Admittedly, letters of consent dated 01.07.2021,
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
