RAJENDER JAINA Vs. PREM BHATIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Respondent entered into a Memorandum Of Understanding dated 25th December, 2006 (MOU) with the appellant for making an audio and video album. Terms and conditions were stipulated in the said MOU, which included an arbitration clause. Disputes arose between the parties regarding execution of work. Appellant invoked arbitration clause and nominated Mr. B.P. Lathwal as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes. Appellant filed statement of claim before the arbitrator. Respondent filed reply as well as counter claim. However, respondent challenged the jurisdiction of arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes, inter alia, on the ground that arbitrator was nominated without his consent, thus, such an appointment was invalid. However, arbitrator proceeded with the matter and gave his Award on 10th Sept., 2012 in favour of the appellant.

(2.) Respondent challenged the award by filing an application under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 before the trial court, which has been allowed by the order impugned in this appeal. Aggrieved by this order appellant has preferred this appeal.

(3.) Respondent contended before the trial court that Arbitrator was not nominated in terms of Clause 10 of the Memorandum of Understanding which required prior consent of the respondent. Appellant had appointed Mr. B.P. Lathwal as Arbitrator without seeking consent of the respondent, thus, Arbitrator had no jurisdiction to enter upon reference and render award. This contention has been accepted by the trial court.