High CourtsSingle Bench

Parvez Sheikh Proprietor vs Fusun Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 31 August 2022 · Citation: (2022) 08 KL CK 0264

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sathish Ninan, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(8), 12(1)
CASE NUMBER
Arbitration Request No.87 Of 2022
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

13 paragraphs · 410 words

Sathish Ninan, J

1.

Annexure-A1 agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the respondent regarding hiring of JCB Excavator. There has arisen disputes between the parties. Annexure-A1 agreement contains arbitration clause providing for resolution of disputes by arbitration. However, the parties were not able to arrive at a consensus regarding the appointment of Arbitrator. It is accordingly that the petitioner has approached this Court.

2.

Heard learned counsel Sri.H.Ramanan, on behalf of the petitioner and Sri.Liji J. Vadakedom, learned counsel for the respondent.

3.

The existence of an arbitration clause in Annexure-A1 agreement is not disputed. Clause-13 in Annexure-A1 is the relevant provision and it reads thus :-

“In case of any disputes, it should be resolved through mutual discussion project officers of M/s Parvez Transport and FIPL. If any points of dispute remain unresolved, they shall be referred to the arbitral tribunal consisting of 3 arbitrators one each to be appointed by and FIPL. 3rd arbitrator has to be appointed by both M/s Parvez Transport and FIPLL on mutual consent. The arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. All disputes arising shall be subjected to the jurisdiction of civil courts of Ernakulam.”

4.

Though the agreement stipulates for constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal with three Arbitrators, it is agreed to by both sides that a sole arbitrator could be appointed. The parties agree that Adv. N.S.Gopakumar, Azhikoth Parambil, Opp. Hotel Crystal Plaza, Banerji Road, Ernakulam-682031, could be appointed as Arbitrator.

5.

Accordingly leaving open the rival contentions of the parties, the Arbitration Request is ordered as hereunder :-

(a) Adv. N.S.Gopakumar, Azhikoth Parambil, Opp. Hotel Crystal Plaza, Banerji Road, Ernakulam-682031, is nominated provisionally as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties.

(b) A copy of this order shall be communicated to the learned Sole Arbitrator by the Advocate of the applicant within a period of one week from today. A copy of the order shall also be forwarded to the learned Sole Arbitrator by the Registry.

(c) The Arbitrator is requested to forward the statement of disclosure under Section 11(8) r/w Section 12(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

(d) The registry shall place the disclosure statement before this Court, for confirmation of the appointment of the Arbitrator.

(e) The Arbitrator's fees shall be payable as per IVth Schedule to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

(f) The arbitration costs and fees shall be shared equally.