Arbitration Case No. 154 of 2008 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Arbitration Case No. 154 of 2008 Date of Decision: 27.04.2010 Creative Consortium ..Petitioner Versus State Bank of Patiala. ..Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUKUL MUDGAL, CHIEF JUSTICE 1.Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present :- Mr. R.K.Garg, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. C.B.Goel, Advocate for the respondent. *** MUKUL MUDGAL, C.J. (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ' the Act), for appointment of a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties. 2. Clause 11 of the agreement contains the Arbitration Clause which reads as under:- “Clause 11: In the event of any dispute, difference or question arising out of or touching or concerning this agreement or the execution of the project, the same shall Arbitration Case No. 154 of 2008 [2] be referred, at the option of either party (state name) to the arbitration of a sole Arbitrator mutually agreed upon, and in default of such agreement both the parties shall appoint one arbitrator each and both the arbitrators shall appoint one presiding arbitrator (umpire). All the arbitrators shall be the Fellows of the Indian Institute of Architects or the Institution of Engineers (India). The said arbitration proceeding shall be under the provision of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 together with any statutory modifications thereof. The award of the arbitrator(s) or umpire, as the case may be, shall be final and binding upon the parties.” 3. As per arbitration clause, the dispute arising out of the agreement at the option of either party to the agreement was required to be referred to a sole Arbitrator mutually agreed upon, and in default of such mutual agreement both the parties shall appoint one arbitrator each and both the arbitrators shall appoint one presiding arbitrator (umpire). The pleadings set up in the petition shows that though a dispute arose but mutual agreement could not be arrived at for referring the same to the sole Arbitrator. The petitioner appointed Shri V.P.Anil as his Arbitrator whereas Mr. K.K.Makkar was appointed as Arbitrator by the respondent bank. However, as per the case set up by the petitioner, the appointment of its Arbitrator Shri V.P.Anil was not accepted by the respondent bank even though all the conditions of clause No.11 of the agreement were satisfied by the petitioner. 4. Upon notice, the respondent bank put in appearance and filed written statement. A perusal of para No. 10 of the written statement shows that appointment of Shri V.P.Anil as petitioner Arbitrator has been accepted by the respondent bank. Para No. 10 of the reply filed by the respondent bank reads as follow:- “10. That contents of para No. 10 of the application are wrong and hence denied. Shri K.K.Makkar stood appointed as an Arbitrator by the answering respondent bank Arbitration Case No. 154 of 2008 [3] whereas the petitioner company has appointed Shri V.P.Anil as the co-arbitrator and therefore the averments that no arbitrator has been appointed so far are misconceived.” 5. In view of the averments set out in para No. 10 of the written statement reproduced above, the grievance raised by the petitioner in the present petition does not survive, therefore, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the Arbitrators appointed by the respective parties to appoint an Umpire as per clause 11 of the agreement within a period of eight weeks from today. In the meanwhile, the parties will exchange the statement of claims and response thereof. The statement of claims be supplied to counsel for the respondent within four weeks and response to the statement of claims shall be supplied to the counsel for the petitioner within four weeks thereafter. The parties shall appear before the Arbitral Tribunal on 06.08.2010 at 4.00 P.M. or on an agreed date convenient to the parties but not later than a fortnight from the date of exchange of pleadings as directed aforesaid. The Arbitral Tribunal shall dispose of the reference not later than six months from the date of first appearance of the parties. (MUKUL MUDGAL) CHIEF JUSTICE 27.04.2010 'ravinder'