Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
IAAP/96/2009 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
PETN.
UNDER ARBITRATION ACT No. 96 of 2009
=========================================
CLEAN
SEA ENTERPRISE - Petitioner(s)
Versus
GUJARAT
MARITIME BOARD - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
PURVISH J MALKAN for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR MAYUR H MALKAN for Petitioner(s) : 1,
None for
Respondent(s) : 1,
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 15/01/2010
ORAL
ORDER
1. The
present Arbitration Petition has been preferred by the petitioner
under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for
appointment of an Arbitrator as per Clause 3.9.2 contained in the
tender contract read with the agreement dated 27/07/2005 entered into
between the petitioner and the respondent to resolve the dispute
arising out of the said contract/agreement.
2. At
the outset it is required to be noted and it is an admitted position
that the contract in question, under which the petitioner is invoking
the Arbitration Clause, was up to 07/12/2006 and according to the
petitioner, vide communication dated 24/11/2006 addressed to the
chief Nautical Officer, Gujarat Maritime Board, their project of one
year of operation was finishing on 07/12/2006. Thereafter, there is
no renewal and/or further contract in writing in favour of the
petitioner. The claim of the petitioner is for the period after
07/12/2006 for which there is no contract in writing in favour of the
petitioner. The petitioner is relying upon oral assurance by the
department and under that oral assurance, petitioner is claiming the
amount for the subsequent period for which there is no contract
between the petitioner and the respondent-Board and, therefore, there
is no question of invoking the Arbitration Clause. The petitioner
cannot rely upon the earlier contract for invoking the Arbitration
Clause, validity of which has expired on 07/12/2006. As stated
hereinabove, the claim of the petitioner is for the period subsequent
to 07/12/2006. Under the circumstances, no relief can be granted to
the petitioner to appoint an Arbitrator as per the Arbitration
Clause mentioned in the earlier contract and/or for the dispute with
respect to the period subsequent to expiry of the contract period
i.e. for the period after 07/12/2006. Under the circumstances, the
present Arbitration Petition deserves to be dismissed and is
accordingly dismissed.
(M.R.
SHAH, J.)
siji
Top