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
9 paragraphs · 350 wordsVipin Sanghi, CJ
1) The respondent has been served through publication. The affidavit of service has been filed on record along with the publication made in the ‘Times of India’ dated 01.11.2021, in respect of notice made returnable on 12.11.2021. Despite service, none has appeared for the respondent. The respondent is, therefore, deemed to be served. Accordingly, I proceed to dispose of the application.
2) The applicant has preferred this arbitration application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act to seek appointment of an Arbitrator in terms of Clause 29 of the agreement entered into between the parties on 01.04.2016, copy whereof has been placed on record.
3) The Arbitration Agreement between the parties reads as follows:
“29. Arbitration and Jurisdiction:
a. This Agreement is exclusively governed by Indian Law. In the event of any dispute or difference between the parties, the same will be referred to arbitration of a common arbitrator if agreed upon or otherwise two arbitrators, one to be appointed by each party and the two arbitrators will appoint a third arbitrator in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1966 and any subsequent modifications, amendments thereto. The venue of the arbitration proceedings shall be at Bangalore.
b. For any suit or legal proceeding arising out of this Agreement only the court at Bangalore shall be the courts having jurisdiction to entertain and try the same.”
4) The applicant states that since dispute arose between the parties, the applicant invoked the Arbitration Agreement on 15.02.2020, and nominated one Arbitrator. The applicant claims dues as outstanding and payable by the respondent to the tune of Rs.74,48,750/- along with interest at the rate of 18% per annum. However, the parties have not been able to constitute the Arbitral Tribunal and, consequently, this application has been preferred.
5) In the light of the aforesaid, I allow this arbitration application, and appoint Mr. Justice V. Jagannathan, Retd. Judge, Karnataka High Court, R/o 003, H Block, Pride Enchanta, Mysore Road, Opposite BHEL, Bangalore – 560 026, as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.