Delhi High Court - Orders
Vadera Interiors And Exteriors vs Apex Buildsys Ltd on 28 November, 2024
Author: Subramonium Prasad
Bench: Subramonium Prasad
$~8
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 134/2024 & I.A. 44869/2024, I.A. 44870/2024
VADERA INTERIORS AND EXTERIORS .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. M.K. Singh, Mr. Saikat Khatua
and Mr. Harsh Garg, Advocates.
versus
APEX BUILDSYS LTD. .....Respondent
Through:
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
ORDER
% 28.11.2024
1. The present petition under Section 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking termination of the mandate of the Ld. Sole Arbitrator in view of the eligibility under Section 12(5) read with Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
2. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner draws attention of this Court to a Communication dated 07.06.2017 sent by the Respondent to the Petitioner whereby the Respondent has unilaterally appointed Mr. Achin Goel, Advocate at E-414, Lawyers Chamber, Karkardooma District Court, Delhi-32. It is stated that, thereafter, once again, the Arbitrator was changed by the Respondent unilaterally vide Communication dated 10.07.2017. It is stated that proceedings are going on before the Ld. Arbitraor.
3. Material on record indicates that the Petitioner had filed a petition under Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for extending the mandate of the Ld. Arbitrator and vide Order dated 21.08.2024 passed by this Court, the mandate of the Ld. Arbitrator was extended. It is stated that in the said petition, the Petitioner had raised the This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/12/2024 at 01:09:29 objection regarding appointment of the Arbitrator on the ground that it is hit by Section 12(5) read with Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 but the said objection was not considered since the said petition was filed under Section 29A(4) and not under Section 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
4. The Petitioner has, therefore, filed the present petition under Section 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
5. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has placed reliance upon an Order dated 14.10.2024 passed by this Court in O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 107/2024, wherein in the analogous matter the mandate of the Arbitrator appointed unilaterally by the Respondent therein has been terminated by this Court.
6. Issue notice.
7. On taking steps, let notice be issued to the Respondent through all permissible modes, including Dasti.
8. In view of the fact that the unilateral appointment of the Ld. Arbitrator is directly hit by Section 12(5) read with Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Judgment passed by the Apex Court in Perkins Eastman Architects DPC Anr. vs. HSCC (India) Ltd., 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1517, all further proceedings before the Ld. Arbitrator shall remain stayed till further Orders.
9. List on 18.12.2024 along with O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 107/2024.
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J NOVEMBER 28, 2024 S. Zakir This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/12/2024 at 01:09:29