Vindair Engineers Private Limited vs Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited on 28 February, 2014

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Vindair Engineers Private Limited vs Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited on 28 February, 2014

Bench: Ram Mohan Reddy

                             1

                                            CMP.123/13

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE

  DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2014

                        BEFORE

  THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM MOHAN REDDY

                  C.M.P. NO.123/2013

BETWEEN :

VINDAIR ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE
PROVISIONS OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956
HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT
No. 2928/2929, 14TH CROSS, K R ROAD
BANASHANKARI II STAGE
BANGALORE - 560 070.
REP. HEREIN BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
MR. B J NARAYANA RAO.
                                         ... PETITIONER

(BY SRI. ANANDARAMA AND PRASHANTH KUMAR D, ADVs.
      FOR M/S. ANANDARAMA PRASHANTH & VIKRAM,
      ADVOCATES)

AND :

RANBAXY LABORATORIES LIMITED
REGISTERED OFFICE AT
A-41, INDUSTRIAL AREA PHASE VIII - A
S A S NAGAR
MOHALI - 160071, PUNJAB
REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
                                        ... RESPONDENT

(BY SRI.UDAYA HOLLA, SR. COUNSEL FOR
      VIVEK HOLLA, ADVOCATE FOR
      M/S. HOLLA & HOLLA, ADVOCATES)
                              2

                                                     CMP.123/13

      THIS PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 11[5 & 6] OF
THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING TO
APPOINT AN ARBITRATOR FOR RESOLUTION OF DISPUTES
BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENTS IN TERMS
OF CLAUSE 14 OF THE CORPORATE GUARANTEE AGREEMENT
DATED 20.10.2011 TO ADJUDICATE UPON AND DETERMINE
THE DISPUTES / DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE PARTIES
ARISING UNDER THE SAID AGREEMENT; ETC.

     THIS PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:


                          ORDER

There is no dispute that clause-14 of the Agreement Annexure-B between the parties is an Arbitration Agreement, though there is serious dispute over alleged disputes said to have arisen out of the said agreement, since according to Sri. Udaya Holla, learned Senior Counsel for the respondent, the alleged disputes relates to disputes arising out of another agreement between the parties [Petitioner and Ranbaxy Nigeria Limited] in respect of which arbitration is to be held in Nigeria.

2. The answer to the question as to whether alleged disputes have arisen under the agreement 3 CMP.123/13 Annexure-B or under the other agreement is for the Arbitrator to decide after an adjudication, regard being had to Sec. 16(1) and (2) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996. Keeping open the said question there is no impediment to appoint an arbitrator.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Sri. Justice S. Patri Basavana Goud, former Judge of this court be appointed as Arbitrator, while learned senior counsel for the respondent submits that Sri. Justice K.A. Swamy, former Judge of this court, be appointed as Sole Arbitrator.

4. Parties having not come to a common consensus over the appointment of the sole Arbitrator, it is appropriate to appoint Sri. Justice R. Gururajan, former Judge of this court, as Sole Arbitrator.

5. In the result, this petition is accordingly allowed.

CMP.123/13

6. Sri. Justice R. Gururajan, former Judge of this court is requested to enter upon reference and conduct arbitration proceedings before the Arbitration Centre - Karnataka [Domestic and International] at Bangalore, in accordance with the Arbitration Centre - Karnataka [Domestic and International], Rules, 2012.

Sd/-

JUDGE AN/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court