DEVENDRA SINGH SAHDEV Vs. RELIANCE JIO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Arbitration Application has been preferred by the applicant to seek appointment of a sole Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties arising out of their agreement dtd. 4/6/2015. Under the agreement, the applicant had leased the premises to the respondent for the purpose of installation, operation and maintenance of single or multiple transmission towers. Disputes have arisen between the parties with regard to fulfillment of their respective obligations. The parties have exchanged legal notices. Eventually, the applicant invoked the arbitration agreement contained in Clause 6(b) of the lease deed vide notice dtd. 14/7/2019, and sought appointment of an Arbitrator. The parties have, however, not been able to eventually agree on an Arbitrator and, consequently, this application has been preferred.

(2.) Clause 6 of the lease deed deals with the aspect of dispute resolution, and the same reads as follows:

(3.) The respondent has filed the counter-affidavit. The respondent does not dispute the fact that the parties had entered into the aforesaid lease agreement. The stand taken by the respondent is that the claim is barred by limitation.