Gujarat High Court
M/S Sadbhav Engineering Limited vs Suwarna Buildcon Private Limited on 19 September, 2025
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/ARBI.P/156/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/PETN. UNDER ARBITRATION ACT NO. 156 of 2025
==========================================================
M/S SADBHAV ENGINEERING LIMITED
Versus
SUWARNA BUILDCON PRIVATE LIMITED
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. SANGEETA PAHWA, ADV. FOR THAKKAR AND PAHWA
ADVOCATES(1357) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR PRIYAM M SHAH(12095) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. PURAV SHAH(14455) for the Respondent(s) No. 1
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA
AGARWAL
Date : 19/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties.
2. The prayer for appointment of a substitute Arbitrator is on the
ground that the learned Arbitrator appointed vide judgment and
order dated 13.09.2024 under Section 11 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 has withdrawn from the office. The
submission is that even the order of appointment of the Arbitrator
dated 13.09.2024 has been affirmed by the Apex court in Special
Leave to Appeal (C) No. 29181 of 2024 vide judgment and order
dated 17.01.2025.
3. The submission is that there is no option for the petitioner, but
to approach this Court to appoint the substitute Arbitrator to bring
the dispute to its logical end.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/ARBI.P/156/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025
undefined
4. Taking note of the above, pertinent is to note that the learned
advocate appearing for the respondent has referred to Rule 21 of
the Rules, 2021, namely the Arbitration Center (Domestic and
International), High Court of Gujarat Rules, 2021 to submit that the
Center itself is empowered to appoint the Arbitrator and in view of
the language employed in sub-section(2) of Section 15 of the Act,
1996, a substitute Arbitrator has to be appointed in accordance with
the Rules that were applicable to the appointment of the Arbitrator
being replaced. The submission is that the Rules, 2021 will be the
relevant rules in view of the language of sub-section(2) of Section
15 of the Act, 1996. This submission is found to be wholly
misconceived for two reasons. Firstly, that the initial appointment
of the Arbitrator was under Section 11 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 and secondly, that reference of rule 21 of the
Arbitration Center Rules, 2021 is wholly misreading of the said Rule,
which applies in the case of a direct Arbitration, where the Center
appoints the Arbitrator or Presiding Arbitrator.
5. The objections taken for appointment of the substitute
Arbitrator by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent is,
therefore, turned down.
6. The present petition stands allowed by passing the following
order :-
ORDER
(i) Hon'ble Mr. Mr. Justice R.P.Dholaria, Former
Judge, High Court of Gujarat, having address
at:Residence : 19, Golden Lotus Bunglow, Auda Water Tank
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/ARBI.P/156/2025 ORDER DATED: 19/09/2025
undefined
Lane, Science City Road, Sola, Ahmedabad- 380060, and
having Email ID: [email protected] is hereby
appointed as the sole Arbitrator to resolve the disputes
between the parties in accordance with the Arbitration
Centre (Domestic and International), High Court of Gujarat
Rules, 2021. Both Parties would also be governed by said
Rules.
(ii) Registry to communicate this order to the sole
Arbitrator forthwith by Speed Post.
(iii) Pending application/s, if any, stands consigned to
records.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
C.M. JOSHI
