SUDESH PRABHAKAR Vs. EMAAR MGF CONSTRUCTIONS PVT. LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IA No.749/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.32/2018, IA No.751/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.33/2018, IA No.753/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.34/2018, IA No.755/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.35/2018, IA No.758/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.37/2018, IA No.760/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.38/2018, IA No.762/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.39/2018, IA No.765/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.40/2018, IA No.768/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.41/2018, IA No.770/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.42/2018, IA No.772/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.43/2018, IA No.774/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.44/2018, IA No.776/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.45/2018, IA No.778/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.46/2018, IA No.780/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.47/2018, IA No.782/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.48/2018, IA No.784/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.49/2018, IA No.786/2018 (Exemption) in Arb. P.50/2018, ARB.P. 32/2018 and I.A. No.748/2018, ARB.P. 33/2018 and I.A. No.750/2018, ARB.P. 34/2018 and I.A. No.752/2018, ARB.P. 35/2018 and I.A. No.754/2018, ARB.P. 37/2018 and I.A. No.757/2018, ARB.P. 38/2018 and I.A. No.759/2018, ARB.P. 39/2018 and I.A. No.761/2018, ARB.P. 40/2018 and I.A. No.764/2018, ARB.P. 41/2018 and I.A. No.767/2018, ARB.P. 42/2018 and I.A. No.769/2018, ARB.P. 43/2018 and I.A. No.771/2018, ARB.P. 44/2018 and I.A. No.773/2018, ARB.P. 45/2018 and I.A. No.775/2018, ARB.P. 46/2018 and I.A. No.777/2018, ARB.P. 47/2018 and I.A. No.779/2018, ARB.P. 48/2018 and I.A. No.781/2018, ARB.P. 49/2018 and I.A. No.783/2018, ARB.P. 50/2018 and I.A. No.785/2018 These petitions under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred as to the 'Act') have been filed by the petitioner(s) seeking appointment of a Sole Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to the Apartment Buyer's Agreement and Sales Deed executed between the parties. The dispute involved is with respect to the demand of payment of Value Added Tax (VAT) raised by the respondent on the petitioner(s).

(2.) In terms of the Arbitration Agreement, the respondent has appointed Justice M.L.Mehta (Retd.) as an Arbitrator in all these petitions as a common question of law and facts is involved in all these cases.

(3.) The petitioner(s) had challenged the appointment before the Sole Arbitrator in the form of an application under Section 12 read with Section 13 of the Act and upon rejection of the said application, they have filed the present petitions.