IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Arbitration Case No. 42 of 2010 Date of Decision: 7.10.2010 Patel Hospital Pvt. Ltd. ..Petitioner Versus Medsave Healthcare & another ..Respondents 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. Rohit Sud, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Samir Rathore, Advocate, for the respondents. **** *** MUKUL MUDGAL, C.J. (Oral) 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ' the Act), for appointment of the Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties. 2. Clause 14.1 and 14.2 of the agreement contains the Arbitration clause which reads as under:- “14.1 Any dispute, claim arising out of this agreement are subject to arbitration and jurisdiction of the courts of Chandigarh. Any amendments in the clauses of the Arbitration Case No. 42 of 2010 [2] Agreement can be effected as addendum, after the written approval from all the parties. 14.2 Any dispute, difference or question arising from this agreement shall be discussed between the parties and resolved amicably. If any amicable solution cannot be reached within 90 days either party shall have the right to have the said dispute settled by arbitration in accordance with the Indian Arbitration Act and the Venue of the Arbitration shall be Chandigarh.” 3. After going through the record, it transpires that notices dated 30.5.2009 and 20.7.2009 (Annexures P-6 and P-7) were sent to the respondents as per the arbitration agreement seeking appointment of the Arbitrator. The receipt of these communications is not denied by the respondents. 4. The main defence of respondents is that they are only acting as Agent of the National Insurance Company and National Insurance Company being proper party has not been impleaded as party to this petition and therefore proceedings cannot proceed against them. In my view, the stand taken by the respondents is wholly unjustified simply because of the reason that the agreement dated 24.7.2008 on which the petitioner seeks to rely upon was executed between the petitioner and the respondents and the collateral agreement between the respondents and the insurance company cannot be relied upon to defeat the arbitration clause. 5. In view of the above, this petition is allowed and Justice R.K.Nehru, former Judge of Jammu & Kashmir, is appointed as sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes between the parties. In the meanwhile, the parties will exchange the statement of claims and Arbitration Case No. 42 of 2010 [3] response thereof. The statement of claim be supplied to counsel for the respondents 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 Arbitrator on 15.12.2010 at 12.0' clock or an agreed date convenient to the parties but not later than 15 days from the aforesaid date, after exchange of pleadings as directed aforesaid. The Arbitrator shall render the award not later than six months from the date of first appearance of the parties. With these directions, the petition stands disposed of. (MUKUL MUDGAL) 07.10.2010 CHIEF JUSTICE 'ravinder'