ARBAP/34/2023
2023 Latest Caselaw 2499 UK

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
                  AT NAINITAL

      THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI VIPIN SANGHI

           ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO. 34 OF 2023

                        25TH AUGUST, 2023

Between:

Lakshmi Prasad Uniyal                      ...... Applicant/Petitioner

and

Govind Ballabh Pant Institute of
Engineering and Technology
and another                                ......         Respondents



Counsel for the applicant     :     Mr. Kaushal Sah Jagati and Mr.
                                    Yogesh   Upadhyay,     learned
                                    counsels

Counsel for the respondents   :     Ms.   Swati   Verma,  learned
                                    counsel holding brief of Mr.
                                    Subhash   Upadhyay,   learned
                                    counsel


The Court made the following:

JUDGMENT:

The applicant has filed a supplementary

affidavit bringing on record the correct agreement

between the parties.

2) The applicant has preferred this arbitration

application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act to seek appointment of an arbitrator to

resolve the disputes between the parties arising out of

their agreement dated 08.02.2021.

3) Under the said agreement, the applicant was

appointed as the contractor to run the hostel mess of the

respondent-Institute. The agreement contains an

arbitration clause, which provides that in the event of

any question of dispute or difference, arising out of the

said agreement, or in connection therein, the same shall

be referred to a sole Arbitrator to be appointed by the

Director of the respondent, or his nominee.

4) In the light of the amendment carried out to

the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, it is no longer open

to the respondent to appoint the Arbitrator. The

applicant invoked the arbitration agreement, since

dispute arose between the parties on 11.04.2023.

However, the parties have not been able to appoint an

Arbitrator mutually. Consequently, this arbitration

application has been preferred.

5) Upon issuance of notice, the respondents have

filed the reply. There is no denial of the agreement

entered into between the parties, as also the fact that

there is an arbitration agreement contained in the said

agreement. The respondent also does not deny the fact

that the applicant has invoked the arbitration

agreement.

6) In view of the aforesaid, since the parties have

not been able to appoint the arbitrator mutually, I allow

the present application, and appoint Mr. Inderjeet Singh,

Retired District Judge, Delhi, Mobile No. 9910384742, to

act as a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes

between the parties arising out of their aforesaid

agreement. The sole Arbitrator shall conduct the

proceedings virtually, and may hold the proceedings in

Delhi, only with the consent of the parties.

7) Arbitration application stands disposed of.

________________ VIPIN SANGHI, C.J.

Dt: 25th AUGUST, 2023 Negi