High CourtsSingle Bench

Jain Builders vs Wavoo Realty and Investments

Madras High Court · Decided on 17 October 2014 · Citation: (2014) 10 MAD CK 0278

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, C.J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6)
CASE NUMBER
O.P. No. 8 of 2012
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 424 words

Sanjay Kishan Kaul, C.J.—A Joint Venture Development agreement was entered into on 17.01.2007 between the parties in respect of land measuring 27 cents out of one acre and 31 cents purchased by the respondent vide sale deed dated 21.11.2005 in T.S. No. 1167, Block 15, T.S. Ward No. 11 of Sindhupoondurai Village, Tirunelveli Taluk. The said agreement contains clause 31 providing for resolution of disputes through arbitration.

2.

Disputes have arisen inter se the parties resulting in communication dated 22.07.2011 by the petitioner invoking the arbitration and proposing a sole Arbitrator as named in the letter. In reply thereto, vide letter dated 27.07.2011 of the respondent, it was claimed that it is the petitioner who have breached the terms of agreement and that they were ready to resolve the disputes through discussion. Thereafter, vide letter dated 06.09.2011 of the petitioner, allegations were rebutted and again the arbitration clause was invoked, but to no avail.

3.

The aforesaid position resulted in the petitioner filing the present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a sole Arbitrator.

4.

Despite the lapse of almost 2 1/2 years, no reply was filed and thus, the right to file reply was closed on the last date of hearing on 19.09.2014 and the matter was adjourned to today making it clear that no further adjournment will be granted.

5.

Once again, a request for adjournment is made by learned counsel for the respondent, which is declined.

6.

In view of the facts set out herein above, right to reply having been closed and thus, it will be a case of no return and the allegations remained unrebutted, there can be no doubt that disputes have arisen inter se the parties, though both sides may have their own version and claims. The arbitration clause is not disputed.

7.

In view of the aforesaid, with consent of learned counsel for the parties, I appoint Mr.K.Alagiriswami, Senior Advocate, residing at Door No. 70 (Old No. 56), 4th Main Road, Gandhi Nagar, Adyar, Chennai - 600 020, as the Sole Arbitrator, to enter upon the reference and after issuing notice to the parties and upon hearing them, pass an award as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of this order. The learned Arbitrator is at liberty to fix the remuneration and other incidental expenses, which shall be borne equally by both the parties.

8.

Accordingly, the original petition is allowed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.