SANGHVI MOVERS LTD. Vs. DILIP BUILCOM LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present application has been filed by the applicant under Sec. 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1996') for appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties arising out of work order/agreement between the parties executed on 27/1/2022, annexure A/2 (page 29-35).

(2.) It is submitted by counsel for the applicant that some dispute in regard to non- payment of dues arising out of the same work order and the concession between the parties arose for which the communication was made by the applicant with the non-applicant and finally notice has been issued on 2/4/2024 for invoking arbitration under Sec. 21 of the Act of 1996, annexure A/3 (page 36-41).

(3.) The non-applicant replied the said notice vide reply dtd. 29/4/2024, annexure A/5 (page 44-47). It is submitted that in the reply the non-applicant has categorically denied for appointment of Arbitrator nominated by the applicant Company. Placing reliance on clause 13 of the arbitration clause of the agreement, it is submitted that as per the clause, the rights are not conferred on the applicant to appoint sole Arbitrator. In fact, it was for the Director of the non applicant Company to appoint the sole Arbitrator and, as such, it is denied that on the invocation of Sec. 21 notice, any Arbitrator can be appointed on the request of the applicant Company.