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
7 paragraphs · 389 words@JUDGMENT-JUDGMENT
The Court: This is an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The arbitration agreement is contained in clause 20 of a development agreement dated 8th July, 2014. The said agreement is a registered agreement.
Payment of full stamp duty in respect of the said agreement will appear from page 33 of the petition being part of the said agreement. It is the case of the petitioner that the keys of the flat were taken by the respondent on or about September 2018. The petitioner's claim is on account of GST payable by the respondent. On taking possession of the flats the claim according to the petitioner have arisen after September 2018 and as such the claim made by the petitioner appears to be not a stale claim. The arbitration agreement provides for appointment of two arbitrators one by each party and the appointed Arbitrators shall choose an umpire. By an electronic mail dated 19th May, 2020, the petitioner had nominated its Arbitrator and requested the respondent to appoint his Arbitrator. The said electronic mail appears to have been received by the respondent. Thirty days' time frame from 19th May, 2020 has expired. The respondent has not appointed his Arbitrator. Despite service of the application and a further notice that the matter will appear in the list today, no one appears on behalf of the respondent.
In such circumstances, I find that there is no embargo in appointing the respondent's nominee Arbitrator. Madhumati Mitra, a former Judge of this Court, is appointed as the respondent's nominee Arbitrator. The petitioner shall immediately serve a copy of the application and this order upon Madhumati Mitra, J. (retired).
In terms of the arbitration clause the petitioner's nominee and the Arbitrator appointed by this order shall appoint an umpire by consensus, failing which it will be open to the parties to approach the Court for appointment of an umpire. Nothing further remains to be adjudicated in this application. The same is disposed of without any order as to costs.
Since no affidavits are called for, the allegations contained in the petition shall be deemed to have not been admitted by the petitioner.
In view of the order, in the main application, no further order is required in GA No.1010 of 2020 and the same is also disposed of.