IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.232 OF 2005 ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.232 OF 2005 ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.232 OF 2005 Travel Agents Federation of India ..Applicant. V/s. Dharmesh S.Salian & Anr. ..Respondents. Mr.Darshan Mehta i/b. D.Liladhar & Co. for applicant. Mr.Ravikant Yadav i/b. Consulta Juris for respondents. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. DATED : 27TH FEBRUARY, 2009. DATED : 27TH FEBRUARY, 2009. DATED : 27TH FEBRUARY, 2009. P.C. :- P.C. :- P.C. :- 1. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents prays for further adjournment on the ground that their clients have not given them instructions and have not got in touch with them despite issuance of notice to their clients by them. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant objected for giving adjournment on the ground that the matter has been pending for a considerable period of time and vide order dated 17/3/2006 the respondents had taken time of one week to suggest the name of the sole Arbitrator either from amongst the retired Judges or - = : 2 : = - practising lawyers. However, without suggesting any names, the matters has been adjourned from time to time and listed today. 3. Today, again learned counsel appearing for the respondents pray for adjournment. I see no reason to grant any adjournment and, therefore, the matter is heard. 4. The parties had entered into an agreement and Arbitration clause 25 of the said agreement, entered into between the parties, provide for appointment of a sole Arbitrator in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. In pursuance to this when a dispute arose between the parties, the applicant served a notice on 24th June, 2005 and the respondent replied the notice by their letter dated 22nd July, 2005 inter alia denying that there was any agreement entered between them and also about the Arbitration clause and appointment of sole Arbitrator. 5. In view of clause 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the application is allowed. In my opinion, there is no valid objection raised by the respondents for appointment of an sole Arbitrator. - = : 3 : = - Consequently, Mr.R.G.Sindhkar, Retired Judge of Bombay High Court is hereby appointed as the sole Arbitrator to look into the matter and proceed with the arbitration proceedings and dispose of the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. 6. Application is disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. CHIEF JUSTICE CHIEF JUSTICE CHIEF JUSTICE