Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Delhi High Court - Orders

M/S Mn Automobiles Pvt. Ltd vs Indraprastha Gas Ltd on 25 August, 2021

Author: Sanjeev Narula

Bench: Sanjeev Narula

$~1 (2020)
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      ARB.P. 140/2020
       M/S MN AUTOMOBILES PVT. LTD.                               ..... Petitioner
                           Through:       Mr. Sudeep           Kumar       Shrotriya,
                                          Advocate.
                           versus

       INDRAPRASTHA GAS LTD.                   ..... Respondent
                   Through: Mr. Deepayan Mandal, Advocate.

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV NARULA
               ORDER
%              25.08.2021

[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]

1. The present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeks appointment of an independent Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate disputes between the parties in respect of the Gas Sale Agreement. The aforesaid Agreement contains an Arbitration Clause which reads as follows:

     "Article 24    DISPUTE RESOLUTION:
     i)             The SELLER and the BUYER shall make every effort to

resolve amicably, by direct informal negotiations. any disagreement(s) or the dispute(s) arising between both the parties in relation to or in connection with this GSA whether directly or indirectly.

ii) If any dispute or difference of any kind whatsoever shall arise out of this GSA (and whether before or after the termination or breach of this GSA) parties hereto shall promptly and in good faith negotiate with a view to its amicable resolution and settlement

iii) In the event, no amicable resolution or settlement is reached within a period of 30 days from the date on which ARB.P. 140/2020 Page 1 of 3 dispute difference arose (in writing), On invocation Arbitration clause by either Party, IGL may suggest a panel of three independent and distinguished persons and inform the same to the other party, other party to select any one among them to act as the sole arbitrator. In the event of failure of the other party to select the sole arbitrator 30 days from the receipt of the communication suggesting the panel of arbitrators, the right of selection of sole arbitrator by the other party shall stand forfeited and IGL shall have right appointment of the sole arbitrator. In such case, the decision of IGL on the with Arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties. The Parties to the dispute will share equally the cost of arbitration as intimated by the arbitrator.

iv) The decision of the Arbitral Tribunal shall be final and binding on both the parties. The place of Arbitration shall be New Delhi and the language of the arbitration should be English."

2. Mr. Deepayan Mandal, learned counsel for the Respondent does not dispute the existence of the arbitration agreement. Without prejudice to Respondent's rights and contentions, Mr. Mandal states that although he does not have any serious objection in case the Court were to appoint an independent Arbitrator, it would be preferable if the Petitioner instead chooses a name from the panel of arbitrators maintained by the Respondent. However, counsel for the Petitioner is not agreeable to any of the names listed in the panel. In these circumstances, it is considered appropriate to allow the present petition by appointing an independent Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

3. Accordingly, Mr. Nakul Dewan, Senior Advocate [Contact: +91 9891325005] is appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate disputes between the parties arising in respect of the Gas Sale Agreement.

4. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Arbitrator, as and when notified. This is subject to the learned Arbitrator making the necessary ARB.P. 140/2020 Page 2 of 3 disclosure under Section 12(1) of the Act and not being ineligible under Section 12(5) of the Act.

5. The learned Arbitrator will be entitled to charge their fees in terms of the provisions of the Fourth Schedule appended to the Act.

6. It is clarified that the Court has not examined any of the claims of the parties and all the rights and contentions of the parties on merits are left open. Both the parties shall be free to raise their claims/ counter-claims before the learned Arbitrator in accordance with law.

7. In view of the above, the present petition is allowed and stands disposed of.

SANJEEV NARULA, J AUGUST 25, 2021 nd ARB.P. 140/2020 Page 3 of 3