:y^-->. ^T ^Ti'^l^l^^t^ v^ •S^ ^|^t|0^, ^TH-y'Ko, fs)01'Mld,< ^ ^. MWvi\ *Nlcb'' W!, 200 3^?r T|^^ (^t^R?y) i^ro:^^^i^r HIGH COURT OF dHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR M.C^. No. 272/2006 APPLICANT M/sl Thr^ugh Age4 M.R| (C.CG|.) RE8PUNDENT M/s.l Delhil, 6B, 016 Star Ferro AUoys Pvt, Ltd., New Trhough The Maaagiag Director, F- |1auz Khas Euclave, New Dethi 110 Present: Shri Anaad Tiwati, Shri Ashish Shritastava, Per Dliirendra Mishra. J. The appUcant has pr^ 11(6) of the Arbitration heremafter referred to as fffhe| appUc|aiit 2. The case of flie applicaiit entercd mto aa Distt, Jaajgir-Chainpa for t4e traasportation and marketj|ng conditions raentioned ui Anriexi provides ^ifmzi) difference or of clauses of ihis Agreeiner^ ^i^id^h ^w^S '^^S ^?^R ^•^fw^i^r Shrce Enterprises, Korba (C.G,) - B,N.Agrawal (Partaer) about 50 years, Son of Late Shn Agraiwal, R/o, Agrasen Marg, Korba Versus i, Advocate for fhe appUcao.t. Advocate for the non-applicaiit. IO^RDJER 13.04.2007 rferred tiiis appUcation under Section a^id Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short |ActB?) for appoiatnient of arbitrator. is that the appUcaat and the non a^reeHient on 11,04.2003 at Baradwar, work providiag labour, Diachiaeries, of Dolomite as per terms aad ixijexure A-l. Clause-11 of ftie agreenient ^ispute arises in the interpretation qfany \t in respect of non compliance qf the XI-HC—78 ^ 3^cr •^l^t^^, ^Tfiy^tC, |sf<?I>iy(d,< TTW^TT *^|cb -^ 200 ^TI^T^T ^^r'^n^i 3?T^?T'q^E ('<I^t^?^) ^mW^^^<¥f oondiiions by either qf the p^ Sole Arbitrator for arbitratio^ cmdConciliationAct, 1996s valld 3. The a^reenient was of signing of fhe agreement. could not be conipleted becal cany out the obUgations on applicaat was constraiaed tc| ofAnnexure-A/2 dated 04.0; provide facihties by perfonni|i agreeraent. However the non dated 07.03.2005 deniedl coniniunication of Annexurd Annexure-A/1 dated 11.04.2<| >rmi|n fhdir 4. The appUcant vide Annexure-A/4 referrmg pro\ iavoked fhe arbitration clau^e process for appointmient of sc^ the three persons for their| referred to a sole arbitrator, 5. Anofher notice was sei A/5 whereby iianies of the non appUcant was requested 45l^fd4i^ 'WI^f ^fe^ <fat^K '^•^fOT^I^l iriies, the matter shall be referred to the under the provisions qf ihe Arbitration for a period of five years frora fhe date |However, the work under fhe agreecaent ^se of fhe failure of fhe non applicaat to |their part as per the agreeinent aad the issue notice as per fhe communication 1.2005, caUiag upon the non appUcaat to |ag fh.eu' obligations as per terois of tlie |appUcaat m their reply ofAnnexure-A/3 fhe allegations levelled in. the t-A/2 aad resciaded the agreement of <D03. communication dated 11.04,2005 of dsions of Clause-11 of the agreeinent and requested the non applicaat to |le arbitrator by suggestmg fhe names of consent so Uiat the dispute may be x|ved to fhe non-applican^t of Annexure - t|iree arbitrators were proposed and tiie to consent on any one offhe proposed ^ XI-HC—78 3:^cT ^il-MI^, ^Tfl^4lC, fs)01<-1^< iTPq^ *N(ch ' arr^r ^? "f^N ^?^i' W^ ^RW ^ LN»- W^ 200 <-3>-_ sn^FTRra; (i^tyi^) •^f^R^^^l^T names for appouitBient of s^le arbitrator wifhin thirty days of the receipt ofthis letter. 6, The non-appUcaD^t vjide 29.07.2005, did not accept th^ reterence was inade to earUel had BiutuaUy agreed on the ^o each of fhem., Cl^use 7. The non-appUcant has petition on fhe ground that A/l caanot be regarded a^ agreeinent does not contenipl^t to arbitration as fhe arbitratiob. fhe clause of fhe agrcesnent, 8. 1 have heard leaaied coi 9. I bave perused fhe| con-espondences flled by fhe ^ non appUcaat that Clause 1 1 difterence or dispute ia the| agreenient in respect of non c<j>ni] tJie parties was conceraed, obUgations of fhe parties ia dispute raised by fhe appllc4iit obUgations by the non appUc^nt <^^{^4I'f 'HIWif ^1^^ <fa^i< ^T 3FJRP? 3T?^[ rcply of Annexurc-A/6 dated nanies suggested by fhe appUcaat and discussions whereby bofh the pardes names of fhe arbitrator to represent [objected to fhe niamtaiaabiUly pf this 11 of the agreement of Annexure - an arbitration agreement aad fhe ^te dispute of aU nature to be referred clause refers ordy to mterpretation of nsel for the pardes, agreeuient as also tihie vanous IppMcant. So far as the objection of fhe tprovides for arbitration wifh. respect to mterprctation of aay clause of fhe (|>mpliance of fhe conditions by eitiier of tpie agreenient provides for respective ^arious clause of fhe agreeinent, The pertaias to non-performing of the as per tertas aad conditious offhe XI-HC—78 ~5^ -^WW^, ^W\<S,, fs<01-H^< ^ 17T17W 9hN|cb ' ^ f^TJ^ ^TI hiai^ -^ 200 ^- 3?T^?T X?5TO (^F^^?) ^^T^R^f^^T^r contract ^rcement. Therefor^ non-appMcant regardiag 10. So far as the allegatio|ris regarding non perfonnanc^ conceraed the same is to be mamjtamabiMty I see no merit ia the objection of fhe mjtamabiMty offlie iastaiit petition. of the appUcaat aad non-applicant of their respective obligations is a|djudged by the arbitrator. 11. Considermg fhat the tato a contract which considering fhat fhe non-app fhe appUcant for the that fhe dispute had arisen is of fhe opiaion fhat a case out, Fjarties to the proceedmgs had entered arbitration clause and further ^caiit has failed to act on fhe request of of arbitrator aad also considering of fhe contract agreeinent, this Court |for appointment of arbitration is made coiijtams appomt(aent oiit 12. Leamed counsel for objection if Hon'ble Shri High Court of Chhattisgarh, ia the present case, Jusltice wiih 13, Therefore, I hereby, HonTble Shri Justice V.K.Shri^ Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, sole 15, Registiy to mtimate former Judge of High Court o <^i^f<'i<ilti 'w^if ^fe^ <fa^8< '^'3ti?Fr^Tj^l tlie parties submit fhat they have no V, K. Shrivastava, former Judge of J^ilaspur is appomted as sole Arbito^tor the consent of the parties, appoint ^astava, former Judge of High Coiirt of |arbitrator, subject to his consent 14. The Hon'ble Arbitrator liay settle his terms and conditions and reinuneration. ^on'ble Shri Justice V.K.Shrivastava, C.G. Bilaspur, about his appomtment XI-HC—78 3^c[ ^|-q|0^, ^Tfi'y^KS, [sf^l^^< ^ W^T^T'^N> ?CT'3^i^^fe ^rs^ <•• f»»^ ^l^dl **<(<*» W1, 200 ^ ^^ 3H^T XT^ (^?^<^) ^^R ^li^ ^tt^r as ArBrG^tor"^^ to^ieECTCTCT| parties. 16, Pardes are also direct^ V,K.Shirvastava, who is pres|e3 Civil Liaes, BUaspur and to| arbitr^ition proceeduigs. M,C,C. is accordiagly di^posed of, fhe papers alongwii&.addrcss of fhe ?d to approach Hon^ble Shn Justice enUy residmg at Bungalow No,B/46, submit papers aiid to take part in ^i^ferah 'w^f '^,'fex^ xfe$i< ^3?iRR^?^ Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge