Gujarat High Court
Shree Maruti Courier Services Pvt. Ltd vs Kamlesh Devjibhai Poriya on 29 January, 2021
Author: Bela M. Trivedi
Bench: Bela M. Trivedi
C/IAAP/74/2020 ORDER
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/PETN. UNDER ARBITRATION ACT NO. 74 of 2020
==========================================================
SHREE MARUTI COURIER SERVICES PVT. LTD
Versus
KAMLESH DEVJIBHAI PORIYA
==========================================================
Appearance:
N R MEHTA(7794) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
NOTICE SERVED(4) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE BELA M. TRIVEDI
Date : 29/01/2021
ORAL ORDER
1. Nobody appears for the respondent though duly served.
2. The petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking appointment of Ms. Niyati Vaidya or any other person as the Court deems fit and just as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties as per provisions contained in Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
3. Learned advocate Mr. Mehta for the petitioner has relied upon the Arbitration Clause contained in para 20 of the Service Provider Agreement (Annexure 'A') as also the notice dated 29.08.2020 issued to the respondent invoking the Arbitration Clause. Though the notice was served through RPAD and through WhatsApp, the same has remained unreplied by the Page 1 of 2 Downloaded on : Sat Jan 30 03:59:48 IST 2021 C/IAAP/74/2020 ORDER respondent.
4. In view of the above, the respondent has neither disputed the Arbitration Clause nor has given any reply to the notice issued by the petitioner. The respondent has also not bothered to appear before this Court though duly served.
5. Under the circumstances, this is a fit case to proceed ex-parte for the appointment of an Arbitrator. Learned advocate Mr. Mehta for the petitioner has requested the Court to appoint any Advocate to act as an Arbitrator as may be deemed just and proper.
6. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Mr. Tirthraj Pandya, Advocate, High Court is requested to act as the sole Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties. Learned advocate Mr. Mehta for the petitioner is directed to obtain the consent / declaration of Mr. Tirthraj Pandya as contemplated in Sixth Schedule (under section 11(8) read with 12(1)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended by the Arbitration & Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015, before the next date.
7. Put up on 12.02.2021.
(BELA M. TRIVEDI, J) AMAR SINGH Page 2 of 2 Downloaded on : Sat Jan 30 03:59:48 IST 2021