SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 35092

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J
M/s.AnanyaKrishnaa Constructions Private limited – Appellant
Versus
R.Abhirami – Respondent
Arbitration Original Petition (Commercial Division)



Advocates:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr.T.Thiageswaran for M/s.Waron & Sai Rams

Court appoints sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) when arbitration agreement process fails due to consent refusal.

Headnote:Under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, parties executed a Joint Development Agreement containing Clause 33 providing for arbitration by a sole arbitrator appointed by the second part with consent of the first part. Disputes arose leading to notice under Section 21, refused consent prompted petition. Court appointed sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes per agreement. Issue framed as appointment of arbitrator under arbitration clause amid consent refusal. Ratio: Parties agreed to arbitration mechanism; court intervention appropriate to effectuate clause by appointing arbitrator when process failed. Petition allowed appointing Mr.M.K.Kabir as sole arbitrator; fees to be fixed in consultation with parties.

Table of Content
1. arbitration clause invoked after disputes and consent refusal. (Para 1 , 2)
2. agreement confirms arbitration by sole arbitrator. (Para 3)
3. court appoints sole arbitrator to resolve disputes. (Para 4)

ORDER

Joint Development Agreement dated 11.03.2016 was executed by the petitioner and the respondent. Clause 33 thereof, which provides for dispute resolution by arbitration, is set out below:

“33. The parties herein agree to settle all disputes, misunderstandings and difference of opinion that might be arising between them whether as to the interpretation of the terms and conditions, contained herein and / or as to the determination of their respective rights, by way of referring such dispute/s to the sole arbitrator to be appointed by the Party of the Second Part with the consent of the Party of the First Part. The procedure as prescribed by the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as amended up to date shall be adopted by the sole arbitrator / umpire as the case may be. The law applicable shall be Indian law and the venue of Arbitration shall be at Chennai. The Courts in Chennai alone shall have sole and exclusive jurisdiction to try all consequential proceedings arising from the said award / arbitration proceedings.”

2. Invoking said clause upon disputes arising between the parties, the petitioner issued notice dated 12.10.2022 under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Upon receipt thereof, by reply dated 05.11.2022, the respondent refused to consent to the person proposed by the petitioner and instead called upon the petitioner to nominate three persons so as to enable the respondent to agree on the sole arbitrator.

3. Thus, parties agree that the joint development agreement provides for dispute resolution through arbitration by a sole arbitrator.

4. In the above facts and circumstances, this petition is allowed by appointing Mr.M.K.Kabir, Senior Advocate, Mobile No.9840044258, as the sole arbitrator. Learned arbitrator is requested to enter upon reference and adjudicate the dispute. The fees and expenses of arbitration shall be fixed by learned arbitrator in consultation with the parties. No costs.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top