N T P C LTD Vs. DISTRICT JUDGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri K.M. Mishra, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, Sri D.C. Mathur, learned Counsel for Respondent No. 2 and perused the record.

(2.) The writ petition is directed against the order dated 8.1.2003 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) whereby the District Judge, Gautambudh Nagar in Original Suit No. 12 of 1998 filed under Section 20 of Arbitration Act, 1940 (hereinafter referred to as the "Old Act") has appointed Sri Sushant Sen Gupta, General Manager Scope (Retd.), D-632 C.R. Part, New Delhi-19 as sole Arbitrator directing him to hold arbitration proceeding and give award within six months and the order dated 5.2.2003 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition) which is a consequential letter issued pursuant to the said order.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended that the first notice for appointment of Arbitrator was given by Respondent No. 3 on 27.1.1996 though the new Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1996") has already commenced on 25.1.1996 and, therefore, the appointment of Arbitrator under Old Act was impermissible and the order of District Judge impugned in this writ petition is without jurisdiction. He submitted that under Section 85 of Act, 1996 only those proceedings where arbitration has already commenced are protected and rest would be covered by New Act. He further stated that proceedings of arbitration would be commenced when the notice was given by one of the parties for appointment of Arbitrator and for this purpose reliance is placed on Apex Court's decision in Milkfood Limited v. GMC Ice Cream (P) Ltd., 2004 7 SCC 288.