Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
IAAP/25/2010 2/ 2 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
PETN.
UNDER ARBITRATION ACT No. 25 of 2010
=========================================================
SORATHIA
VELJI RATNA & CO - Petitioner(s)
Versus
VADODARA
MUNICIPAL SEVASADAN VADODARA & 1 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR.
MUKUND V JOSHI for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR NILESH A PANDYA for Respondent(s) :
1,
NOTICE SERVED for Respondent(s) :
2,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 18/02/2011
ORAL
ORDER
The
petitioner seeks appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to resolve disputes between
the petitioner and Vadodara Municipal Corporation (“VMC”
for short). It is not in dispute that under contract between the
parties, there is an arbitral clause in following terms :
“Sole
Arbitrator
Municipal
Commissioner, VMC shall be the sole Arbitrator, for any disputes and
differences of any kind arising out of or in connection with the
contractor or the carrying out of the works during the progress of
the works or after their completion shall be referred to and settled
by Municipal Commissioner, VMC. The decision of the Municipal
Commissioner shall be final and binding to both parties.”
Since
disputes arose between the parties, petitioner under its
communication dated 29.6.2009 requested the Municipal Commissioner of
Vadodara to act as an arbitrator and resolve the disputes. In the
said letter it was stated that :
“By
invoking above provision, we refer to you, in capacity as Sole
Arbitrator dispute which have arisen while execution of subject work.
We, now, urge you to assume position of Sole Arbitrator, a Quasi
Judicial Authority, and urge you to commence arbitration and inform
us accordingly, so that we can submit our dispute along with detailed
submissions for resolution to you as Sole Arbitrator. Urging for
early action in capacity of Sole Arbitrator”
Since
despite such communication, there was no positive response from VMC,
the petitioner moved present arbitration proceedings praying for
appointment of arbitrator. In response to notice issued by this
Court, respondent appeared and filed affidavit dated 14.10.2010
stating that Municipal Commissioner has decided to hear the
petitioner and decide the dispute as sole arbitrator and therefore,
this petition be disposed of accordingly.
Having
heard learned advocates for the parties and having perused the
documents on record, in terms of clause-37 of the contract between
the parties, Commissioner Vadodara is appointed as sole arbitrator to
decide all disputes between the parties arising out of contract dated
10.5.2006. It is clarified that Commissioner or his successor in his
office shall continue such arbitration proceedings till the final
arbitral award.
With
above directions, the petition is disposed of.
(Akil
Kureshi,J.)
(raghu)
Top