THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Arbitration Application No.134 of 2010 (Dated : 23-08-2011) Between: Newstoday Private Limited …Applicant A n d Mr.N.Venkata Subbaiah & Ors. …Respondents THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Arbitration Application No.134 of 2010 ORDER: This application has been taken out by Newstoday Private Limited under sub-sections (5) and (6) of Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of arbitrator for resolution of the disputes relatable to Training cum Service Agreement dated 9.4.2008. 2(a). Newstoday Private Limited (in short, `the applicant’) is a Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 having its registered office at Eenadu Complex, Somajiguda, Hyderabad. The applicant is engaged in the activity of collection and dissemination of news all over the world through Newspapers and Television network. The applicant sponsored the 1st respondent- N.Venkata Subbaiah for diploma course in Journalism in Eenadu Journalism School, Ramoji Film City, Hyderabad on the assurance of his working with the applicant for a continuous period of four years including the period of diploma course and advanced training on such terms and conditions the applicant describes, and the 1st respondent agreed for the same and executed an agreement dated 9- 4-2008. The respondents 2 and 3 (Mr. Balaobanna and Mr. Mahaboob Basha) stood as sureties to the 1st respondent. Under the terms of the agreement, the respondents 2 and 3 agreed to compensate the applicant in a sum of Rs.75,000/- in the event of the 1st respondent failing to perform his obligations during the training period under the agreement. After completion of training course in Eenadu Journalism School, the 1st respondent was appointed as Trainee Sub Editor/Reporter, vide letter of Appointment–Trainee dated 3.6.2009 for a training period of one year. The 1st respondent accepted the same and joined as Sub Editor/Reporter. 2(b) While undergoing training, the 1st respondent remained absent continuously from 28.7.2009. The applicant issued letters dated 8.8.2009, 19.8.2009 and 29.8.2009 requiring him to join the training course. There being no response from the 1st respondent, the applicant called upon him to show cause under notice dated 10-10- 2009 as to why he should not be discharged from training for his continuous and unauthorised absence from 28-7-2009. In spite of the receipt of the said notice, the 1st respondent failed to give any explanation. There being no option, the applicant discharged the 1st respondent from training, vide letter dated 14-11-2009 and directed the respondents 2 and 3 to pay compensation amount of Rs.75,000/-. The respondents did not choose to respond. Hence, this application seeking appointment of arbitrator for resolution of the disputes between the parties relatable to the Training cum Service Agreement dated 9-4-2008. 3. Notice to the respondents 1 to 3 came to be ordered on 6.9.2010. The applicant was permitted to take out personal notice to the respondents by registered post acknowledgment due. Accordingly, the applicant took out notice and filed proof of service. Despite service being effected, the respondents did not choose to enter appearance either in person or through a counsel to resist the application. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the applicant and perused the material brought on record. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the 1st respondent having joined the training, on his name being sponsored by the applicant, discontinued the training and failed to report despite repeated letters. There being no response from the respondents, the applicant invoked arbitration clause and proposed the name of Shri K.Prakash, Advocate as arbitrator and communicated the same to the respondents for consent. However, the respondents failed to respond. A further submission has been made that as per the Training cum Service Agreement dated 9-4-2008, the disputes between the parties are required to be settled by a sole arbitrator. Learned counsel refers Clause (18) of the Training cum Service Agreement, which reads as hereunder:- “ In the event of any dispute (including any Industrial Dispute) or difference which may arise between the parties or their representatives with regard to the construction, meaning and effect of this deed or any part thereof or their respective rights and liabilities thereunder, the same shall be referred to the sole arbitration of an arbitrator to be nominated and whose award shall be final and binding on the parties. The provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 shall govern the Arbitration Proceedings”. 6. In view of the above arbitration clause, I find that the applicant made out valid ground for appointment of arbitrator for resolution of the disputes between the parties relatable to Training cum Service Agreement dated 9-4-2008. 7. Accordingly, the arbitration application is allowed appointing Sri M.Bhaskar, a retired District Judge R/o H.No.16-2-753/C/1, Plot No.30, Revenue Board Colony, Malakpet, Hyderabad-36] as arbitrator for resolution of the disputes that have arisen between the parties, relating to Training cum Service Agreement dated 9-4-2008. He shall fix his own fee. _____________________ B.SESHASAYANA REDDY, J Dt.23-08-2011 RAR THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY Arbitration Application No.134 of 2010 (Dated : 23-08-2011)