KANAGARANI DURAIRAJ Vs. A S DWARAGAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is the respondent in O.P. No. 216 of 1997, on the file of VI Additional City Civil Court (in charge of VII Additional City Civil Court). The said petition was for appointment of an Arbitrator.

(2.) PETITIONER-Kanagarani Durairaj entered into an agreement with the 1st respondent for construction of a hospital, wherein there is a clause stating that all disputes and differences arising out of or relating to the said agreement shall be referred to a sole Arbitrator or two Arbitrators. The agreement is dated 2-1-1996. Difference arose between the parties and the same were referred to Arbitrators, namely, Sivasubramaniam and two others. They inspected the building and made certain suggestions to the respondent. But he did not comply with same, and measured the constructed area and the additional area to be constructed area and the additional are to be constructed and gave instructions to the first respondent to complete the work by 10-3-1997. They directed the petitioner to pay Rs. 4, 75, 000/-. First respondent, even after receipt of the amount, did discharge his duty, and he left the work as it stands, and permitted the petitioner to have her own contractor for completing the work. Thereafter, first respondent, ignoring the report of Sivasubramaniam and two others, moved an application under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act for appointment of an arbitrator. The application was filed under the old Arbitration Act, 1940. The same was seriously opposed by the petitioner herein on the ground that the Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition and appoint an arbitrator in view of the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996. According to the petitioner, under Section 11 of the new Act, the burden and responsibility of Civil Courts appointing Arbitrators are taken away and are passed on to the statutory authorities named in the new Act, viz., the Chief Justice or any person or institution designed by him. In view of the said provision, an argument was taken before the civil court that the 7th Judge, City Civil Court has no jurisdiction, to deal with the matter.

(3.) THE only Notification brought to my notice is dated 6-3-1996 issued by the Chief Justice of Madras High Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Ordinance of 1996. Relevant portion of the Notification for our purpose and the procedure read thus,