Delhi High Court
Turner Morrison Limited vs Parvati Devi & Anr on 8 March, 2016
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Order delivered on : 8th March, 2016
+ ARB.P. 442/2015
TURNER MORRISON LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Lalit Gupta, Adv. with Ms.Garima
Goel, Adv.
versus
PARVATI DEVI & ANR ..... Respondents
Through Mr.M.Dutta, Adv.
+ ARB.P. 443/2015
TURNER MORRISON LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through Mr.Lalit Gupta, Adv. with Ms.Garima
Goel, Adv.
versus
PARVATI DEVI & ANR ..... Respondents
Through Mr.M.Dutta, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH
MANMOHAN SINGH, J.
1. The petitioner has filed the present petitions under Section 11 read
with Section 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter
referred to as "the Act") for the appointment of substitute arbitrator.
2. The details of the earlier litigations and the facts of the present
petitions are mentioned in para 1 to 29 of the petitions.
3. The petitioner had filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act, bearing
O.M.P. No. 73/2007 which was allowed by learned Single Judge of this
Court vide common judgment dated 23rd September, 2009 passed in two
connected petitions bearing OMP No. 73/2007 and OMP No. 117/2007.
4. In Arb.P. 442/2015 Construction Agreement dated 11th
December,1995 contained the following arbitration clause :-
"10. In the event of any dispute or differences between the
parties relating to terms of this Agreement or any part thereof, the
same shall be referred to the sole Arbitration of Shri P. V. Kapur,
Senior Advocate whose decision shall be final and binding on the
parties. The venue of the arbitration shall be in Delhi and it shall
be concluded in accordance with Indian Arbitration Act, 1940."
5. In Arb.P. 443/2015 Maintenance Contract dated 15th October,
1999 contained the following arbitration agreement/ clause:-
"22.1. Any dispute or differences between the parties hereto
relating to or arising out of this agreement shall be referred to the
sole Arbitrator, acceptable to all parties, to be appointed by
Tuareg. The arbitration shall be conducted in accordance with the
Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 and/or any statutory
modification thereto and the venue of arbitration shall be at
Delhi. The expenses of the arbitration proceedings shall be borne
by each party in equal proportion."
6. In view of the abovementioned arbitration clauses, the petitioner sent
a notice dated 16th June, 2007 bearing reference No. L-110/2007 and L-
111/2007 in Arb.P. 442/2015 and Arb.P. 443/2015 respectively, through its
counsel to the said named Arbitrator namely Mr. P.V. Kapur, Senior
Advocate and copies of the said notice were also sent to respondents. In the
said notice, it was mentioned that due to disputes having arisen between the
parties, the same ought to be adjudicated by the process of arbitration and
thus by invoking the said arbitration clause; a request was made to the said
named Arbitrator to enter upon reference. The said notice was duly served
upon the respondents as well as the said named Arbitrator.
7. As the respondents raised some objections about Mr. P.V. Kapur,
Senior Advocate, this Court appointed an independent Arbitrator.
Thereafter, this Court nominated Justice Arun B. Saharya (Retd.)(Former
Chief Justice of High Court of Punjab & Haryana) as the Arbitrator in both
the matters. This Court also observed that in case Justice Arun B. Saharya
(Retd.) has no reservations, he shall enter the reference and shall charge fee
from the parties as per the standard set by Indian Council of Arbitrators. In
terms of the order dated 6th March, 2009, the suit being CS (OS)
No.1650/2007 and the application being I.A. No. 13444/2007 were disposed
of.
8. It is informed that many meetings were held by Justice Arun B.
Saharya (Retd.) which were duly attended by the petitioner. A statement of
claim along with relevant documents has been filed in both the matters on
behalf of the petitioner before the said sole Arbitrator.
9. By communication dated 1st August, 2012 addressed to the counsel
for the petitioner as well as the respondents, Justice Arun B. Saharya (Retd.)
had informed that he did not wish to serve as an Arbitrator in the said
arbitration proceedings. Justice Arun B. Saharya (Retd.) has resigned and
withdrawn from the office of the sole Arbitrator in terms of Clause (a) of
Sub-Section 1 of Section 15 of the Act. The counsel for the petitioner was
requested to collect all the papers and documents submitted on behalf of the
petitioner in both the arbitration proceedings against the receipt.
10. Under these circumstances, the petitioner filed a petition under
Section 11 read with Section 15(2) of the Act, bearing Arbitration Petition
No. 96/2013 praying for appointment of a substitute Arbitrator in both the
disputes.
11. By order dated 9th October, 2013, the said Arbitration Petition No.
96/2013 was allowed and Justice A.P. Shah (Retd.) was appointed as the
substitute Arbitrator. All the records of Arbitration were requisitioned by
this Court vide its order dated 4th March, 2013 passed in Arbitration Petition
No. 96/2013. However, even the substitute Arbitrator namely Justice A.P.
Shah (Retd.) resigned as Arbitrator as communicated by letter dated 22nd
November, 2013.
12. Thus, in terms of Section 15(2) read with Section 11 of the Act, the
present petitions have now been filed to appoint a substitute sole Arbitrator
on the same terms and conditions already passed pertaining to the earlier
sole Arbitrator.
13. It appears that there exist disputes between the petitioner and the
respondents which need to be adjudicated upon by an independent substitute
Arbitrator to be now appointed by this Court in accordance with the
Arbitration Agreement/Clauses.
14. Both parties have given their consent in this regard. They also agreed
that all the objections raised by any party would be considered by the sole
Arbitrator as per its own merit who would continue the proceedings at the
stage left by the earlier sole Arbitrator. The terms and conditions would
remain the same. Ordered accordingly.
15. Accordingly, Justice R.V. Raveendran (Retd. Judge of Supreme Court
of India) is appointed as substitute sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes
arising out of the agreements in question between the parties.
16. The petitions are accordingly disposed of.
17. Copy of this order be given dasti to the learned counsel for the parties
and a copy thereof be delivered to the learned Arbitrator.
(MANMOHAN SINGH)
JUDGE
MARCH 8, 2016
