SOURABH ISSAR Vs. CLOUDSEK INFORMATION SECURITY PRIVATE LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Sec. 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator or any other arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the petitioner and the respondent company with reference to the disputes set out by the petitioner in the dispute notice dtd. 12/7/2022 at Annexure-H and notice dtd. 2/8/2022 at Annexure-J pursuant to clause 15.2 of the agreement dtd. 11/10/2018 at Annexure-B.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was employed by the respondent company as the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to employment agreement dtd. 29/6/2018 and management agreement dtd. 11/10/2018. The petitioner tendered his voluntary resignation on 3/5/2022. Thereafter, the respondent company is said to have been issued show cause notice to the petitioner. However, the learned counsel for the respondent company would submit that the show cause notice was in fact issued prior to the submission of the resignation at the hands of the petitioner. Nevertheless, since the dispute arose between the parties, the petitioner caused a notice dtd. 12/7/2022 calling upon the respondent company to resolve the dispute within 15 days from the date of the receipt of the dispute notice. It was further stated that if the dispute is not resolved within 15 days from the date of receipt of dispute notice, the petitioner would be constrained to invoke the arbitration clause as contained in Clause 15.2 of the agreement. However since there was no response from the side of the respondent company, the petitioner got issued a notice for arbitration on 2/8/2022.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the respondent company issued a reply to the notice of invocation of the arbitration clause at the hands of the petitioner on 1/9/2022 and in paragraph No.38, the respondent company had in fact agreed for appointment of sole arbitrator. However, it is also stated in paragraph 38 that the claim raised by the petitioner insofar as the ESOP claims was denied by the respondent company to be a subject matter of the arbitration clause 15 invoked by the petitioner under the agreement.