Jubilee International Public School vs Educomp Solutions Limited on 17 February, 2017

[Cites 3, Cited by 1]

Karnataka High Court

Jubilee International Public School vs Educomp Solutions Limited on 17 February, 2017

Bench: A.S. Bopanna

                          1



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

     DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017

                       BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.S. BOPANNA

        WRIT PETITION NO.6658/2017 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

JUBILEE INTERNATIONAL PUBLIC SCHOOL
NO.14/1, 3RD MAIN
NAGARABHAVI 2ND STAGE
JAYALAKSHAMMA LAYOUT
BENGALURU - 560 072
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN
SRI.T.V.MOHAN.                      ...PETITIONER

(BY SRI.GANAPATHI.C.V, ADV.)

AND:

1.     EDUCOMP SOLUTIONS LIMITED
       NO.1211, PADMA TOWER -1
       5, RAJENDRA PALACE
       NEW DELHI - 110 008.

       REPRESENTED BY ITS
       AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.

2.     EDU SMART SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED
       L-74, MAHIPALPUR EXTENSION
       NEW DELHI - 110 037.

       REPRESENTED BY ITS
       AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
                                 2



3.   SMT.REKHA GUPTHA
     SOLE ARBITRATOR
     NO.18, 2ND FLOOR
     JANGPURA EXTENSION
     NEW DELHI - 110 014.                   ...RESPONDENTS

     THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226
AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO
QUASH THE APPOINTMENT LETTER DATED 4.6.2016
APPOINTED THE R-3 AS A SOLE ARBITRATION NEW
DELHI, BY R-1 & 2 IN ARBITRATION MATTER AT
ANNEXURE-B AND ETC.

    THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                             ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court assailing the letter dated 04.06.2016, where under, the Arbitrator has been appointed by the respondent. The petitioner in that regard is also assailing the notice dated 25.01.2017 issued by the learned Arbitrator who has been appointed. Further, the petitioner is seeking quashing of the further proceedings before the Arbitrator.

2. At the outset, it is to be noticed that the respondent does not answered the requirement of 3 Article 12 of the Constitution as an 'other authority' so as to maintain this writ petition. That apart, the appointment of the learned Arbitrator is made by one of the parties to the agreement, to which the petitioner is also a party. If at all, the petitioner has any grievance in that regard, the petitioner would have to avail the appropriate remedy provided in law, as the Writ Petition of the present nature would not be maintainable. With such liberty, petition stands disposed off.

Registry to return the documents if any sought by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Sd/-

JUDGE tsn*/Chs

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court