ATUL AGRAWAL Vs. ASHIMA SYAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the 'Act') contains a prayer for appointment of arbitrator.

(2.) ADMITTED facts are that this is second visit of the applicant before this Court. Earlier the applicant filed an application under Section 11(6) of the Act, which was registered as AC No.23/2011. This Court by order dated 4.10.2012 disposed of the said application. This Court opined that as per the agreed procedure, the applicant was required to indicate as to what was the dispute which needs to be decided by the arbitrator. Existence of dispute is sine qua non of appointment of an arbitrator. After giving finding that the applicant has failed to indicate the nature of dispute, this Court gave liberty to the applicant to send a proper notice and then proceed in accordance with law. In turn, the applicant sent a notice dated 13.10.2012, Annexure 'D'. In this notice, the applicant mentioned about the nature of the dispute and claims. Lastly, it is prayed as under : -

(3.) SHRI N.K.Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, submits that the respondents have submitted their reply to the said notice on 29.10.2012. The contents of the notice and reply makes it crystal clear that their exists a dispute and, therefore, this Court may appoint an arbitrator.