IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO.11 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO.11 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO.11 OF 2008 WITH WITH WITH ARBITRATION PETITION NO.12 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO.12 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO.12 OF 2008 WITH WITH WITH ARBITRATION PETITION NO.13 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO.13 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO.13 OF 2008 WITH WITH WITH ARBITRATION PETITION NO.14 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO.14 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO.14 OF 2008 WITH WITH WITH ARBITRATION PETITION NO.15 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO.15 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO.15 OF 2008 WITH WITH WITH ARBITRATION PETITION NO.16 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO.16 OF 2008 ARBITRATION PETITION NO.16 OF 2008 M/s.Sujal Agrotechs ..Petitioner. V/s. Tata Teleservioces (M) Ltd. ..Respondent. Mr.Rahul S. Konoorkar for petitioner. Mr.O.P.Soni with Mandar Parkar for respondent. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. DATED : 19TH SEPTEMBER, 2008. DATED : 19TH SEPTEMBER, 2008. DATED : 19TH SEPTEMBER, 2008. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. By this common order, I shall dispose of all the 6 petitions wherein application under section 11 of the Arbitratation and Conciliation Act, 1996 have ben filed. The applicant which is a partnership concern and is carrying out the business of construction and other activities, having their office at Pune, entered into contract on 12th July, 2007 to carry out site infra works - GBT ROM PHASE 2 and a - = : 2 : = - purchase orders No.7800001306 for a net amount of Rs.55 lakhs of site infra works - GBT ROM PHASE - 2. 2. By this contract in all the 6 cases, the applicant had entered into different contracts for execution of work and accordingly, respondents have issued different purchase orders for the work of similar nature but under different contracts. The dispute seems to have arisen between the parties and clause 16.1 of the contract between the parties provided for resolving of the dispute by a Arbitrator. Clause 16.1 reads as under:- " 16.1 - If the Parties fail to resolve disputes, differences, controversies, claims by consultation within a period of thirty (30) days from the date upon which such notice of disputes has been given, the disputes, differences, controversies, claims shall be referred to and finally settled by arbitration under the Arbitration and Concilation Act,1996. " 3. The applicant served the notice upon the respondents who responded to the said notice but did not appoint an Arbitrator and put forward its case that it was essential to take measurements of the site work before the matter can be considered either for payment or for reference to arbitration. 4. Even before the Court, there is no dispute of the execution of the agreement /contract and the - = : 3 : = - existence of the arbitration clause. The only apprehension of the non applicant before the Court is that it will be essential to take measurements of the site work in order to adjudicate the clai and counter claim of the parties. Learned counsel appearing for the parties submit that they have no objection for appointment of a sole arbitrator. As they are unable to agree on the name of the Arbitrator, they leave it to the Court to appoint an Arbitrator consequent to the terms of the agreement. 5. Shri S.P. Bharucha, Former Chief Justice of India is apointed as the sole Arbitrator to look into the matter and proceed with the arbitration proceedings and dispose of the same in accordance with law. 6. The parties are further agreeable and in fact fairly concede that the Arbitrator may be requested to appoint a Commissioner-cum-expert in terms of section 23 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act who shall take the measurements of the site work under all the 6 contracts and submit his report to the Arbitrator expeditiously. 7. In view of the above, all the petitions are disposed off by appointing a sole Arbitrator and - = : 4 : = - further that the Arbitrator should appoint a Commissioner-cum-expert to take the measurements of the site work, who shall submit a report to the Arbitrator as expeditiously and thereafter, the Arbitrator shall dispose of the arbitration proceeding in accordance with law. 8. All the petitions are disposed off with no order as to costs. CHIEF JUSTICE CHIEF JUSTICE CHIEF JUSTICE