- Court
- High Court of Delhi
- Decided
- 8 November 2016
- Case no.
- ARB.P. 589/2016
Judgment
O R D E R %
08.11.2016
¶1This is a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudication of disputes between the parties arising out of the Agreement dated 1st July 2011 entered into between them.
¶2Despite second call none appears for the Respondent. The Respondent is proceeded ex parte.
¶3The averments made in the petition to the existence of an arbitration clause and the notice 31st March 2016 to the Respondent invoking the arbitration clause remains uncontroverted.
¶4The Court, accordingly, proposes that Mr. Rajeev Sharma, Advocate (Mobile No.9810104886) be appointed as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the
ARB.P. 589/2016
disputes between the parties including their claims and counter-claims. The arbitration shall take place under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre ("DAC"). In the first instance the proposed Arbitrator will make a disclosure to the DAC in terms of Section 11 (8) read with Section 12 (1) of the Act and thereafter enter upon reference. DAC will provide to the parties copies of the said disclosure. 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. Considering that the Respondent is proceeded ex parte, the learned Arbitrator shall proceed after service of notice upon the Respondent.
¶5Subject to compliance with the above direction, Mr. Rajeev Sharma will act as Arbitrator and enter upon reference. The fees of the learned Arbitrator will be in terms of the Delhi High Court Arbitration Centre (Arbitrators" Fees) Rules.
¶6The petition is disposed of. A copy of this order be communicated to the Mr. Rajeev Sharma as well as Additional Coordinator, DAC forthwith.
S.MURALIDHAR, J NOVEMBER 08, 2016 Rm
ARB.P. 589/2016
Case details
Parties and counsel
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 589/2016 BARISTA COFFEE COMPANY LIMITED ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. Mayank Mehandru, Advocate. versus RELIANCE MEDIA WORKS LIMITED ..... 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.