SRI BAL MANOHAR JALAN SON OF LATE HIRA LAI JALAN Vs. INDUMATI R.V.SINGH WIFE OF LATE CAPTAIN RAN VIJAY SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS case has been filed by Sri Bal Manohar Jalan for appointment of an arbitrator in terms of Arbitration Clause in the Development Agreement dated 26.7.2001 (Annexure -1) between him as the developer and opposite parties as the owners of the property in question. It is not in dispute that the ' said agreement was signed by the petitioner as well as all the opposite parties in which there was clause 29 with respect to Arbitration.

(2.) HOWEVER , both the aforesaid parties were aggrieved and levelled charges against the other alleging violation of the terms of the agreement requiring arbitration. In the said circumstances, the owner, namely, Smt. Indumati R.V. Singh (opposite party no. 1) filed Request Case No. 74 of 2007 for appointment of an Arbitrator for resolving the dispute between the parties and in that case affidavit was sworn on her behalf by her daughter Urwashi Kumari (opposite party no. 3). In the said case Sri Bal Manohar Jalan (petitioner) who was the sole opposite party therein appeared through his learned counsel. On the other hand, the instant Request Case No. 10 of 2008 was filed by the petitioner Sri Bal Manohar Jalan for appointment of an Arbitrator for resolving the dispute between the parties as per Arbitration Clause in the aforesaid agreement. In the said case affidavit was sworn by the petitioner himself. In the said case there were three opposite parties but only opposite party no. 1 Smt. Indumati R.V. Singh appeared through her learned counsel.

(3.) BOTH the aforesaid cases were taken up together by this court on 13.7.2009 as they had been filed by one or the other party to the Development Agreement dated 26.7.2001 as per its Arbitration Clause No. 29, impleading the other party to the agreement as opposite party in the respective case. However, after arguments the aforesaid Sri Bal Manohar Jalan and Smt. Indumati R.V. Singh agreed for appointment of one Arbitrator for redressal of their respective grievances raised in both the Request Cases as they had arisen out of the same agreement. Learned counsel for both the parties after consulting their respective clients arrived at a consensus that Justice Shashank Kumar Singh, a retired Judge of this court, be appointed as an Arbitrator in terms of the provision of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act ' for the sake of brevity). Accordingly, vide common order dated 13.7.2009 this court disposed of both the aforesaid request cases appointing the said Arbitrator directing him to proceed and dispose of the claim of the parties in terms of the provision of the Act.