CHANDESHWAR PRASAD SINGH Vs. JHARKHAND STATE HOUSING BOARD AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, JHARKHAND STATE HOUSING BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since the controversy is not with respect to the Clause of the Arbitration between the parties and the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the petitioner may approach the respondent -arbitrator itself and they will look into the grievance of the petitioner, there is no need to appoint arbitrator. In alternative, in view of the judgment delivered in the case of Northern Railway Administration, Ministry of Railway, New Delhi Vs. Patel Engineering Company Limited reported in : (2008) 10 SCC 240, the Court must have due regard to the qualifications required by the agreement or other considerations necessary to secure the appointment of an independent and impartial arbitrator.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner gave notice to the respondent to appoint the arbitrator but they failed to appoint the arbitrator, therefore, now the respondents can neither say that they will appoint the arbitrator nor they can give name of the arbitrators as the Court alone can appoint the arbitrator. However, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is the discretion of the Court to appoint any person as an arbitrator.

(3.) I considered the submission of the parties and perused the reasons given in the judgment in the case of Northern Railway Administration (Supra). Since, the dispute has been raised by the petitioner and notice has been given by the petitioner and the respondents have not appointed any arbitrator, it is a fit case to appoint an arbitrator. However, non -appointment of the arbitrator by the respondents itself is not disqualification to the named arbitrator and I do not find any reason to have any deviation from the agreement exists between the parties..