RANU KETAN Vs. GENERAL MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Although the present application has been filed under Sec. 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1996') but the prayer has been made in the application for appointment of a substitute arbitrator for resolving the dispute between the parties.

(2.) On a pointed query being raised to learned counsel for the applicant, he submits that the application has wrongly been preferred under Sec. 11 of the Act of 1996, whereas it should have been made under Sec. 15 of the Act of 1996. Therefore, treating this application to be preferred under Sec. 15 of the Act of 1996, this application is being decided finally.

(3.) The facts in the present case are that on an application being preferred by the petitioner, this Court vide order dtd. 12/08/2014 appointed one Shri D.K.S Rai, Chief Engineer, C.A.D., Irrigation, Kota to act as a sole arbitrator for resolving the dispute. Since the arbitrator did not proceed with the matter, an application was preferred by the applicant under Sec. 15 of the Act of 1996 for appointment of a substitute arbitrator.