">-,. ^ ^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUbICATURE AT BILASPUR ARBITRATION APPLICATION N0. A3 /^®^^° APPLICANT >^ .^^^^^ t^^" RESPQNDENT Vs Shree Kanhaiya Transport Services Private Limited, a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, acting through its birector Shri Vaibhav Mishra, son of Dr. S.N. Mishra, aged about 33 years, resident of Sunder Nagar, Raipur (CG) 1. Raipur City Bus Limited, a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. having its registered office at Raipur acting through its Chief Executive Officer, Raipur City Bus Limited, Raipur (C<5) 2. Chief Executive Officer/ Raipur Gity Bus Limited, Nagar Nigam, Main Office, Malvi Road, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ^(7(T° "^ / <^ ^pp^c^r0^ ^ APPEAb UNbER SECTION 11 (6)0P THE ARBITRATCON ANb CONCILIATION ACT. 1996 i ^. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTiSGARHAT BILASPUR Arbitration ADoiication No.43 of 2010 ^ APPUCANT RESPONDENTS Shree Kanhaiya Transport Servjces Private Limited Versus Raipur City Bus Umited and another. APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 11 (6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND ^ CONCILIATIONACT.1996 t (SB: Hon'bleMr. N.K. Aaarwal. J.) Present : Mr. Rajeev Shnvastava, counsel/for the applicant. " ^ Shri Alok Bakshi, counsel for the respondents. ^' t^ ORALORDER (19.07.2011) 1. The applicant has preferred appljcation under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (henceforth 'the Act') for appointment of Arbitrator. 2. Brief facts of the case are as under: i. A bid was Jnvited by the respondent on 05.10.2007 to give exciusive righttoply city buses in the routes mentioned in the Annexure-IV of the bid document. ii. The applicant's bid offer was accepted for routes No. 1,4, 6 & 7. An agreement was executed on 17.12.2007 between R.C.B.L. and Shri Vaibhav Mishra, a partnership/proprietorship firm sltuated at C/o Krishna Fuels, Mahadeo GhatRoad, Sundar Nagar, Raipur. iii. On 22.2.2008 the applicantand the respondent entered into a supplementary agreement which incorporates the fact that in exercise of power conferred under Clause 1.4 ofthe mainagreement the operator has duly incorporated and registered a company under the Companies Act, 1956 inthe name and styled as 'Shri Kanhaiya Transport Services Private Limited'. iv. In the suppjementary agreement dated 22.2.2008 there is a clause 2 ^ which says that the respondenVRCBL undertakes unconditionally that it wlli not grant anyone else the rights to ply buses on the route Nos. 1, 4, 6& 7 allotted to the applicant/company by it during the currency of the agreement. 3. According to the applicant/Company, therespondent failed its obligation as per dause 5.5 of the agreement dated 17.12.2007 and dause 1 of the supplementary agreement dated 22.2.2008. Vide letter dated 15.06.2009 the respondent demanded the amount ofmonthlyfix charges from the appljcant. 4. The applicant, vide its letter dated 24.6.2009, requested respondent to fulfill its obligation as per clause 5.5. of the agreement and further requested that the amount of monthly fix charges may be adjusted with the amount of ^- Rs.2,38,696.83, which is to be paid by the respondent to the petjtioner and ~^r balance amount will be paid to the applrcant. In its reply dated 24.6.2009, the respondentdirected the applicant to pay monthly fix charges amounting to Rs.18,41,514/-. 5 . In the above circumstances, the applicant vide its letterdated 13.1.2010 invoked arbitration clause i.e. clause 23 of the agreement dated 17.12.2007 and demanded appointment of sole Arbitrator in the matter. The respondent neither appointed the Arbitrator nor settled the dispute. Hence, this application. ^ 6. I have heard counsel for the parties andperused the material available on record. ^" 7. In the instant case, existence of arbitration agreement is not in dispute. As per the applicant, the amount of monthly fix charges could be adjusted by the respondent in the amount of Rs.2,38,696.83/-, which Ss to be paid by the <,y respondent to the petitioner. On the other hand, as per the respondent, the applicant cannot be relieved from the payment of monthly fix charges amounting to Rs.18,41,514/-. Thus, there is clearly a dispute between the parties with regard topayment of monthlyfix charges. 8. Considering that the parties to the proceedings had entered into contract which contains arbitration ciause and further considering that the respondents have failed to act on the request ofthe applicant for appointment of arbitrator and also considering that the dispute had arisen out of contract agreement, this Court is of the opinion that a case for appointment of arbitrator js made out. ^. ^.- <'. 9. Learned counsel for both the parties submitted that the matter can be referred for arbitration jn terms of clause 23 of the agreement for resolution of their dispute before the Arbitral Tribunal headed by Shri Justice V.K.Shrivastava, a retired Judge of this High Court. 10. Therefore, with the consent of the parties, the matter is referred for arbitration to Arbitral Tribunat headed by Shri Justice V.K.Shrivastava, retired Judge of this High Court. 11. The Hon'ble Arbitrator may settle his terms and conditions and remuneration. 12. Registry of this Court to intimate Shri Justice V.K.Shrivastava regarding ^ his appointment as Arbitrator in the instant matter to Tesolve the dispute arose ^ between the parties. Neeessary papers bealso sent to Shri Justice V.K.Shrivastavaalong with addresses ofthe parties. ^ 13. Parties to the application are also directed to approach Shri Justice V.K.Shrivastava, Mridu Villa, Warehouse Road, Opp. State Lega! Services, Bilaspur and to submit their relevant papers and also to take part in arbitration proceedings. 14. In view of the above, this appljcation for appointment of Arbitrator stands dispose<d of. Sd/- N.K. Agrawal Judge Anjani