Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
IAAP/2/2011 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
PETN.
UNDER ARBITRATION ACT No. 2 of 2011
=========================================
M/S
SPML INFRA LTD (FORMERLY SUBHASH PROJECTS AND MARKETING -
Petitioner(s)
Versus
GUJARAT
WATER SUPPLY & SEWERAGE BOARD & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================
Appearance :
MR
KG SUKHWANI for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR MEHUL H RATHOD for Respondent(s) : 1 -
2.
=========================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 05/08/2011
ORAL
ORDER
1. Petitioner
seeks appointment of an Arbitrator under Section 11 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Between the petitioner and
the respondent some dispute arose out of execution of work under
Works Contract dated 25.06.1999. Petitioner, therefore, initially
approached the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration
Tribunal by filing Arbitration Reference No. 35 of 2006. This
reference was disposed of by order dated 04.10.2010 holding it as not
maintainable before the Tribunal. Thereupon, the petitioner issued a
notice to the respondent on 19.10.2010 and besides raising several
claims, also invoked arbitration clause contained in the agreement.
The petitioner thereupon appointed one Shri P.T.Gaurani, Chief
Engineer (Retired) of Government of India as the sole Arbitrator and
also called upon the respondents to appoint their arbitrator.
Petitioner also conveyed that if the respondents failed to do so
within thirty days, petitioner would approach Gujarat High Court
under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
2. In
response to the said notice, the respondents replied under the
communication dated 10.02.2011 stating that respondents have selected
name of Shri P.MChauhan, retired Judge of the Gujarat High Court, if
the petitioner consents to the same, further procedure can be
undertaken. The petitioner, however, through its advocate, conveyed
on 17.02.2011 that the name suggested is not agreeable to the
petitioner. At that stage, the petitioner approached this Court
seeking to invoke the provisions of Section 11 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act for appointment of the Arbitrator by the Chief
Justice or his delegate.
3. In
the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the opinion that the
request of the petitioner is required to be granted. Since the
petitioner and the respondent could not agree to a common name for
appointment of the Arbitrator, I deem it appropriate to appoint
Hon’ble Mr. C.K.Thakkar (retired) to act as Sole
Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the petitioner and
respondent arising out of work contract dated 25.06.1999. Petition
stands disposed of accordingly.
[AKIL
KURESHI, J.]
JYOTI
Top