GPT MBPL (JV) Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed by the applicant under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short "AC Act, 1996"?) seeking appointment of an arbitrator to settle the dispute between the parties.

(2.) Shri Atul Choudhary, learned counsel for the respondent at the outset has submitted that in the case of M/s Mehrotra Buildcon (P) Ltd. Vs. Union of India & others, this Court, in AC No.131/2018, in an identical contract between the other party and the present respondents, has already allowed the application for appointment of arbitrator and in that case Shri A.K. Selot, Retd. Judicial Officer, Bhopal has been appointed as an Arbitrator, which has subsequently been replaced by Shri A.K.Saxena, retired Judge, High Court of M.P.

(3.) Shri Shashank Verma, learned counsel for the applicant has admitted that said fact, however, it is submitted that in the present case the place of arbitration shall be at Jabalpur and not at Bhopal, which is the mandate of the present agreement. Learned counsel for the applicant has drawn the attention of this Court to Clause 64(1)(iii) of the agreement, which reads as under:-