PREM PRAKASH Vs. GENERAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, 'the Act of 1996') for appointment of arbitrator.

(2.) Mr. Anand Mohan Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that general conditions of contract was part of the agreement entered into between the parties and the application for appointment of arbitrator was rejected by the Additional District Judge, Korba on 2-4-2002 against which Civil Revision No.432/2002 was preferred, that has been dismissed by this Court on 28-9-2016 holding that the Act of 1996 would apply and granted liberty to the applicant to file application under Section 11(6) of the Act of 1996. He further submits that in accordance with the liberty given, this application under Section 11(6) of the Act of 1996 has been filed in which this Court has allowed the application under Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and condoned the delay in filing the application by order dated 20-1- 2017. This High Court is the appropriate High Court for appointing arbitrator.

(3.) Mr. Sachin Singh Rajput, learned counsel for the non-applicant, relying upon the agreement submits that all disputes arising out of or in any way connected with the agreement shall be deemed to have arisen in Sambalpur and only the Courts in Sambalpur shall have jurisdiction to determine the same and since there is exclusive jurisdiction clause, the application as framed and filed would not be maintainable and the Orissa High Court will have jurisdiction to hear the matter and therefore no original arbitration agreement has been filed. He further submits that the claim is barred by limitation.