Kerala High Court
Hiran Valiyakkil Lal vs Vineeth M.V on 6 October, 2021
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 14TH ASWINA, 1943
AR NO. 83 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 HIRAN VALIYAKKIL LAL, AGED 36 YEARS,
S/O V.B. HEERALAL, VALIYAKKIL HOUSE, BRAHMAKULAM P.O.,
THAIKKAD, THRISSUR-680 104.
2 APARNA HIRAN, DUTT COMPOUND, MANAKAVU, VALAYANADU,
KOZHIKODE-673 007.
3 SALIJA, DUTT COMPOUND, MANAKAVU, VALAYANADU,
KOZHIKODE-673 007.
BY ADVS.SANTHOSH MATHEW
VIJAY V. PAUL
A.K.MUHAMMED HASHIM
GOKUL ASOK
RESPONDENTS:
1 VINEETH M.V, S/O VISHWANATHAN, AGED 35 YEARS, MANATHIL
HOUSE, KANDANSSERY, ARIYANNUR, THRISSUR-680 102.
2 PRAKASAN, S/O NAYARKANDIKUNHIKANNAN, RESIDING AT
KALYANIKA, JYOTHI NAGAR, PUTHIYANGADI, WESTHILL,
KOZHIKODE-673 005, KERALA.
3 K.V.SREEJA, D/O GOPALAN RESIDING AT KALYANIKA, JYOTHI
NAGAR, PUTHIYANGADI, WESTHILL, KOZHIKODE-673 005,
KERALA.
BY ADV. SRI.SHARAN SHAHIER
THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
AR NO. 83 OF 2021
-2-
ORDER
The petitioners have filed this Arbitration Request, invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short), asserting that they had entered into Annexure A1 Agreement with the respondents; and alleging that certain disputes have arisen between the parties relating to and touching upon the terms of such Agreement. They point out that, going by Clause 43 of Annexure A1 Agreement, all such disputes are to be adjudicated and resolved only through the mechanism of arbitration and therefore, that they have been constrained to approach this Court.
2. Sri.Santhosh Mathew - learned counsel for the petitioners, explained his clients case further arguing that it was not them who had AR NO. 83 OF 2021 -3- invoked arbitration clause at the first instance, but the respondents themselves, which is evident from Annexure A7 letter issued by them, nominating a particular person as their choice of Arbitrator. He then showed me that his client replied to Annexure A7, through Annexure A8, agreeing to subject themselves to arbitration to resolve the disputes, but suggesting a senior counsel of this Court, since they were not agreeable to the person suggested in Annexure A7. He thus predicated that the respondents cannot object to this Court appointing a competent independent sole Arbitrator; and prayed that this Arbitration Request be allowed.
3. In response, Sri.Sharan Shahier - learned counsel appearing for the respondents, conceded that his clients had invoked the arbitration Clause in Annexure A1 Agreement, by issuing Annexure A7 notice. He, therefore, prayed that this Court may appoint a suitable Arbitrator, since the parties have not been AR NO. 83 OF 2021 -4- able to arrive at any consensus as to the person to be so nominated.
4. I have examined Annexure A1 Agreement and it is without doubt - as is expressly admitted - that Clause 43 thereof provides for resolution of disputes between the parties only through the process of Arbitration.
In the afore circumstances, I allow this Arbitration Request in the following manner:
(a) I nominate Mr.Justice
A.M.Shafeeque, High Court of Kerala
(Retd.), 'Marhaba', House No.C.C.33/12, Green Ripple Road, Swamipadi, Elamakkara P.O., Kochi - 682 026, as the sole Arbitrator, to adjudicate and resolve the disputes and differences between the parties to this case arising from and relating to Annexure A1 Agreement.
AR NO. 83 OF 2021 -5-
(b) The Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator within a period of two weeks from today and to obtain a Statement of Disclosure from him under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
(c) Once the Disclosure Statement is obtained from the learned Arbitrator, the Registry shall release the certified copy of this order, with a copy of the said statement appended to it, retaining the original of the same on the files of this case.
(d)The fees of the Arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
(e) The parties to this case are ad
idem that they will share the
AR NO. 83 OF 2021
-6-
arbitration costs and fees equally and it is so recorded.
(f) In order to enable the Arbitrator to commence the proceedings without delay, I direct the parties to mark appearance before him at 11 A.M. on 10.11.2021.
This Arbitration Request is so ordered.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE RR/akv AR NO. 83 OF 2021 -7- APPENDIX OF AR 83/2021 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF ORIGINAL LLP AGREEMENT OF PETITIONER DATED 9.9.2016 ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE BILATERAL AGREEMENT DATED 18.1.2018 ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE SUPPLEMENTARY PARTNER ADMISSION AGREEMENT DATED 11.1.2019 ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF THE BOARD RESOLUTION OF THE FIRM DATED 12.1.2021 ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN CA 49/KOB/2021 BEFORE THE HON'BLE NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, KOCHI BENCH AT KOCHI DATED 18.6.2021 ANNEXURE A6 TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY FIRM TOWARDS RESPONDENT DATED 3.7.2021 ANNEXURE A7 TRUE COPY OF THE ARBITRATION NOTICE ISSUED BY RESPONDENT DATED 15.7.2021 ANNEXURE A8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO ARBITRATION NOTICE DATED 28.7.2021 SENT BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONERS