Vinod Gazta vs State Of H.P. & Another

M.S. Ramachandra Rao, CJ

This application has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties arising out of work awarded to the applicant on 14.07.2017 by the respondents. Clause 25 of the agreement between the parties provides for arbitration.

According to the applicant, legal notice was got issued by the applicant to the respondent on 02.06.2023 invoking Clause 25 of the agreement and seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudicating the dispute between the parties, but there was no reply given by the respondent thereto.

In the reply filed to the application by the respondents they have disputed the claim of the applicant on merits and also contended that there is no existing dispute between the parties requiring invocation of provision of the Act.

Since this court is precluded from going into such contention in view of the amendment to Section 11 by introduction of Clause 6A, and since there is no valid objection for appointment of an Arbitrator, this application is allowed and Shri M.D. Sharma, District & Sessions Judge (retired) is appointed as Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties, after his disclosure in writing is obtained in terms of Section 11(8) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and only after receipt thereof, shall his appointment, as an Arbitrator, come into force.

On his giving consent to arbitrate the dispute between the parties as an Arbitrator, Shri M.D. Sharma, District & Sessions Judge (retired), shall enter into reference, and shall pass an award in accordance with law.

Copy of this order be forwarded to the learned counsel for the parties as also to the learned Arbitrator. The learned Arbitrator so appointed shall be entitled to fee as per stipulation contained in 4th Schedule appended to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The application is disposed of accordingly.