VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Delhi High Court 2016 › High Court of Delhi

Tata Telesrvices Limited v. Gaurav Pratap Singh Sisodia

Court
High Court of Delhi
Decided
2 November 2016
Bench
S. Muralidharauthor
Case no.
ARB.P. 453/2016

Follow Delhi High CourtFollow S. Muralidhar

Judgment

O R D E R %

02.11.2016

¶1The report of the postal authority of service of notice through speed post is that the packet was 'refused by the addressee'.

¶2None appears for the Respondent. The Respondent is taken to have been served and is proceeded ex parte.

¶3The averments in the petition regarding the existence of an arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties and its being invoked by the Petitioner by sending a legal notice remain uncontroverted.

¶4The Court, accordingly, proposes that Mr. Shishir Pinaki, Advocate (Mobile No.9811528408) be appointed as an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties including their claims and counter-claims. In ARB.P. 453/2016

the first instance, the proposed Arbitrator will make a disclosure in terms of Section 11 (8) read with Section 12 (1) of the Act and thereafter, enter upon reference. In the event the disclosure is not made within a reasonable time or such disclosure discloses the inability of the proposed Arbitrator to act as such, it will be open to the parties to apply to this Court for directions. The learned Arbitrator shall fix his own terms and communicate them to the parties. Since the Respondent has been proceeded ex parte, the Arbitrator will proceed in the matter after ensuring service of summons upon the Respondent. The venue of the arbitration shall be fixed by the Petitioner and shall be intimated to the Arbitrator one week in advance. The Petitioner will appear before the learned Arbitrator at the said venue on 5th December, 2016 at 4 pm, or some other convenient date or time convenient to the proposed Arbitrator which will be communicated by him to the Petitioner at least ten days in advance.

¶5The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

S.MURALIDHAR, J NOVEMBER 02, 2016 mg

ARB.P. 453/2016

Case details

Parties and counsel

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 18. + ARB.P. 453/2016 TATA TELESRVICES LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through: Ms. Shalini Sati Prasad, Ms. Sumedha Sharma, Advocates versus GAURAV PRATAP SINGH SISODIA ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR

Source: High Court of Delhi, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.