I % 28·01·2004 Present MrAjit Puddusery for tbe petU!oner. Ms$amihya Kohli for respondentllndhm CQllDlld Arhltration. VIs.TamaU Wad for respondent/Union ofIndla. < ,\1r $.K. Singla fQr the respondcllt. + WP CC) 1'\05,- 18412002, 6481,2002. 649/2002. 65012002, 65212002, 665/2002., 68012002., 18512002, IS6120Q2. 18812002. ;11Ji8/:£!l{t'. 31(;912002. .3170/ZI}02. 3I7l/200l. 317.312002. 317412002. 3178[20lU., 358412002, 3596f2002. 3600f2001. 1498(2002. 1499f2002. 150112002.150412002.1505/2002. J506l2002. '" It is contended by counsel for the parties that these matters are •- fully covered by a decision of the Supreme Court in tbe case of Foo(l Corporation of India Vs. Indian COlLflcit of ArlJitratioll & Ors. etc. JT . 200.' (5) SC 480. In the said judgmen.t, Supreme Court gave the foUowin2 dirccti.ODS "Keeping into consilleratioD aU these aspect>;. we consider it ju..<rt and more appropriate, proper and rea!mnable· both hi law.and in equity and of justice to d1rcct leA to forthw:ith and not later thM! sixty days from tills date DOlninate the arbitrator a5 sought for by the appellant:> and the matters before l-uch arhitrator. leaving tY[len to !he parties to raise and pursue all. obJections' and and thereby seek for the decision of the ar\li1rat!:tT as envisaged undcr Section 16 or the 19% Act. llP.'!'irtes Retling adjudication of tbe rr.specftvt" di'q'Jutes ill the.<le cases on mt'rits and i.n acco:-dana 'With law. Both. parties will liave leave and liberties to do !It) l)cfoTe the arl,iaator on being Dominated/appointed by tbe TCA pursuant t) oI"d",r<;." Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified (0 Following tile judgment of the Supreme Court ill Food Corporation of India (supra). we (lired the lCA to rortllwith and not latcr • than si.'\'1y days from today,. nominate tue arbitrator sought for by tile petitioner and place tbe matter before such arbitrator leRYiIig open to the parties to rais;: and purs1Ie aU objeLiions and contenlions and therehy seek for, the decbion of llle arbitrator as envisaged under Section 16 of tht' Arhitratior and Conciliation Act, 1996. besides getting adjudication of'U,le , ;;::., respective disputc$ in lliese on and in accordance willi law. Both the contracting parties wiU haveJeave and Uherties to dQ so before the arbitrator on being nominated/appointed by tbe leA , pursuant to lliese orders. Writ petition sta;nds disposed of in terms 1hcl'cof. " L-7(. ....--f--_. VIjender 1f.fn. J. t,"-\·.... January28, 2004 J. SA