COMPUCOM SOFTWARE LIMITED Vs. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY SECONDARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSTANT application has been filed Under Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of Arbitrator.

(2.) THIS is not disputed that agreement was executed between the parties and it contained Clauses 36 & 37 for settlement of their disputes through arbitration. Since certain disputes arose out of agreement executed between the parties, the applicant served a notice on 29th June, 2007 [Ann.9] which was duly served in the office of respondents and even till approaching. This Court by filing instant application on 8th August, 2007, there is no material on record to show that Arbitrator was appointed by the respondents in terms of clause of agreement [supra]. Relevant Clauses 36 & 37 are reproduced as under:

(3.) RESPONDENT No. 3 has filed reply wherein it has been averred that a committee was constituted by the Government on 10th July, 2007 for taking decision with regard to computerization in educational institutions and letter was circulated to the government authorities on 24th July, 2007 and more specifically counsel has stressed on Clause 6 of the proceeding. He further submits that so far as Board of Secondary Education is concerned, it is a nodal agency and government who has to take final decision in all matters including dispute, if there is any, as it has been observed above. The State Government who has, as usual practice, not come out with any explanation despite ample opportunity being afforded and no assistance either way has been provided to this Court.