IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR C.G.) ghaia Math MISC. CIVIL CASE NO. \V 5/OF 2004 IN THE MATTER OF: RAIPUR THROUGH: - THE COMMISSIONER MUNICIPAL CORPORATION MALVIYA ROAD RAIPUR (C.G.) \w/ MEMO OF REQUEST UNDER SECTION 11 (6) OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 READ WITH PARAGRAPH 2 AND 3 2 OF THE SCHEME FOR APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS BY THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT, 2002 FOR THE APPOINTMENT OF THE SOLE ARBITRATOR VALUE OF SUBJECT MATTER OF THE DISPUTE \/ PETITIONER: ARDESHIR B. CURSETJEE an sows LIMITED, A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OE THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT MACKINNON MACKENZIE BUILDING, 4, SHOORJI Vw" ¢ NI VALLAEHDAS MARG, BALLARD ESTATE, MUMBAI 4oo 001. VERSUS RESPONDENT MUNICIPAL CORPORATION @ XI_HC—78 3a W, Wm, Emma? Wccm.19§/ff1 wwwu ”.m. Ea 200 WW<W¥D XI—HC—78 W mwm procedure laid down in Indian Ar bitration Act of 1996 and the rules made apply in the mater of the reference. it is further contended tha" reiation to the wcrk of agreemt made by the petitioner for redr notice dated 16th June 2004 c Commissioner (Finance), Munici respondent detaiiing the dispute agreement and caiiing upon the r for arbitration ae per Clause Subsequentiy, eeverai reminder addressed to the respondent, ho respondent as per Clause 11 (2: has been fiied for appointment of The respondents in their the notices have not been addi addressed to Dv. Commissione' within the meaning of Ciause 11 couid be taken under Section ' However, after fiiing of the ab respondent have suggested the referring the dispute arose betwes thereunder from time to time shal :there is a dispute between the parties in ant. Number of correspondences were essal of his grievance and ultimately a f Annexure P-6 addressed to the Dy. oal Corporation, Raipur, was sent to the arose between parties out of the contract espondent for referring the above dispute a 11(2) of the contract agreement. s of Exs.P-7, P-8 and P—Q were also Never, when no action was taken by the of the contract agreement, this petition sole arbitrator. 'eply have raised a objection that since essed to the proper authority and it is (Finance) which is not a valid notice (2) of the contract agreement, no action 11(6) of the Act for want of notice. ave petition the petitioner as also the names of arbitrators to be appointed for an the parties. i have heard teamed coun: ;el for the parties. 1‘. r0 . . mggryaHE WW q Li .ow 200 mmwiawt) ,2: mah‘rm mm§wm WWW matwm %a1%wm However, at the time of h the proceedings that they have Sen, retired Judge of MP. High arbitrator to adjudicate the disput also not in dispute that there is contract agreement between th arbitrator for adjudication as per and the instant diepute arose in this Court can entertain this petiti So far as the obiection of to Dy. Commissioner (Finance) c vaiid, is concerned, this objectio that the respondent was weii awz the respondent was duty bound i the contract agreement and sind Court has jurisdiction to appoint a As a result, the application an arbitrator is held to be made o l, therefore, hereby appoi Judge of MP. High Court, Jabalj some dispute or differences out of the e parties which may be referred to the Clause 11(2) of the contract agreement the jurisdiction of this Court and as such on for appointment of arbitrator. the respondent that the notice addressed fthe Municipal Corporation, Raipur is not n cannot be accepted in View of the fact ire of the dispute between the parties and ‘10 act in accordance with Clause 11(2) of e he has failed to appoint arbitrator, this rbitrator as per Section 11(6) of the Act. is allowed and a case for appointment of ut. earing it was submitted by the parties to no objection if Hon’ble Shri Justice CAP. Court, Jabalpur is appointed as the sole u) 1t Hon’ble Shri Justice C.P. Sen, retired )ur, presently residing at Jnanranjan Sen XI—HC—78 3aW, WINE,W W [QB/0. :1 (75”Q Wm ¢..;¢.o~oo‘~ 200 Wm (W) ’J/ mm $1m mm?W §Wm ammm mmwm a;WW The contract agreement between the parties is not in dispute. It is XI—HC—78 ww,eahwra,f§aragt f4iff'lVa.j ‘45 w WWW WWW WWW WW§WW éamm Marg, 205, Congress Nagar, Nagpur-440012, as Arbitrator, subject to his consent The Hon’ble Arbitrator remunerations. Registry to intimate H0i MP. High Court, about his a; papers along with address of ti Parties are aiso directet (Reid), who is presently resid Nagar, Nagpur and to subn proceedings. may settie his terms and conditions and i’ble .Shri Justice C.P. Sen, retired Judge of vpointment as Arbitrator and to send ail the 1e parties. ito approach Hon’bie Shri Justice C.P. Sen ng at Jnanranjan Sen Marg, 205, Congress iit papers and to take part in arbitration Sd/— .Dhirendra Mishra Judge Wm ooooo.o.oooooooo e00. wt 200 mm (W) P.T.O.