01‘;yt: a ' V w 7 05 ?ETIT10NER M/s Leot nic Scaies Pvt. Ltd” A company incorpora ed and registered under the Compams Act, 1956, having Its regtste’ office at 47 Height Market, Amritsar (Punjab), through its authorized signatary and general power of attorney holder S ri Ram‘Krishna Paramhans, aged abQut 37 years, S/a Shri K.N‘Rx Naidu, at. present vorklng as Genérai Manager, Sought st Region, R/o House No.5—3, DUrga Ngar, Near Venkatsai Hospitai, Dilsukh ar, Hdrabad (A.P.) Vs RESPONiiEN'T Chhattis h State Warehousing Corporati‘nf through its Managing Director, 2, Anand Nagar, Raipur (CG) 4.3.25@3 Mr, Vinay Pandey, Advoca'efor the petitioner. Mr. Shashank Thakur, Advcate for the respondent. The petitioner has moved this application under Section 11 of t, 1996 ,(for short “the Act”) for appointment of Arbitrator with he averments that the petitioner’s offer in response to the hotice inviting tender dated 29.9.2006 for suppiy, erection and maintenace of the electronic control pitless lorry weigh bridges at 16 places as accepted by the respondent and after due negotiation supply 'orer was issued to‘the petitioner on 7.12.2006/11.12.2006. The ave order was further confirmed by the respondent vide Annexure P 3 dated 3.2.2007 81 21.2.2007. The petitioner applied for exte the Arbitration gt Conciiiation on of delivery period as @l l r N g y g r c b n i W EWWW § \ construction was delayed. Howaver, their application for extension of time was not repiied to and the respondent issued a show cause notice to the petitioner on 25.6.2007 (Annexure P-B) caiiing upon ’ him to show cause as to why seturity deposit should not be fortified. The respondent aiso threatened 'gthe petitioner to impose penaities and iiquidated damages vide Annexure P-lO. Thereafter, the petitioner invoked Clause 4.13 of terrns & conditions of agreement, which provides for arbitration, asking them to settle the dispute ‘ through negotiation. Respondent informed the petitioner vide Annexure P-12 dated 21.8.2001‘ that there is failure for amicable settlement and threatened to ake over entire infrastructure and thereafter cancelled the contra t and fortified the security deposit vide Annexure P-13 dated 5.9.2 07. The petitioner served t respondent with a notice dated 19.9.2007 of Annexure P-14 in okihg the arbitration clause, which was received by the respond statement of ciairn and reques the dispute within 30 days of eceipt of the notice, as per Clause 4.13.2 of contract. Since'the r ondent failed to appoint Arbitrator, as requested, the instant applica ion has been filed. The respondent in their re urn have not disputed the existence of arbitration agreement and bmitted that they have already ‘ appointed Arbitrator vide Annex re R—l of dated 13.11.2007. Learned counsel for the p titioner submits that appointment of has filed Arbitrator was made by the res ondent after the petitioner on 29.0.2007, and submitted his to appoint Arbitrator to adjudicate h e t p e u mm 1 W200 mmqqhaiu) WWW WWW mmm $§WM§wW ‘ *amm wmm the instant application for app4 and therefore, appointment ofi meaningless and the Arbitrator with the provisions of Section 1 I have heard learned cou In View i of the undispi respective parties that they which contains arbitration ciau the parties arising out of the arbitration agreement; effort to resolve the dispute between the parties Clause 4.13.1, has failed; appointment of Sole Arbitra: agreement, the respondent within a period of 30 days; t 31.10.2007, whereas, the re on 13.11.2007 i.e. after fill petitioner, a case for appoin Section 11 (6) of the Actis ma On the last date of hearing, learned counsel for the parties in order to enable them to agree on he Sole Arbitrator for the parties submitted that they Ointment of Sole Arbitrator and they have no objection if Hon'ble Ju tice V.K. Shrivastava, Retired Judge, )intment of Arbitrator on 31.102007 Arbitrator by the respondent becomes has to be appointed in accordance 1 (6) of the Act. 1sel for the parties, ited facts in the pleadings of the entered into a contract agreement, se 4.13; dispute has arisen between . amicably through negotiation, as per on request dated 19.9.2007 for or, as per Ctause 4.12.3 of the e failed to appoint Sole Arbitrator instant application has been filed on indent have appointed the Arbitrator g of the instant petition by the ment of the Sole Arbitrator under e out. prayed for a short adjournmen the question of appointment of Today, learned counsel have agreed upon for the ap h h s v WW “i200 mwww) WWW wmm mwm I the matter and to send an th papers parties High Court of CG; Bi!aspur is appointéd as Sale Arbitrator in the matter. ‘ In View of the above, i hereby appoint Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. igh Court of Chhattisgarh as Sole Shrivastava, Retired Judge, H Arbitrator m the matter, subject o his consent The Hon’bie Arbitrator m y aettie his terms & conditions and remu neratlon Registry to Intimate Hon 'b e Mr Justice V K Shrivastava, Retired }udge, High Court of C G abou his appomtment as Sole Arbitrator in along With addresses o the Parties are also directed to approach Hon’ble Mr 3ustice V K Shrivastava, Retired Judge, who rs presently residing at ‘Near the office or State Legal Aid Authority, Wa e House Road Biiaspur’ and to submit papers and to take part in the a itrauon proeeedmgs gig]; puma Judge The application is accordi gly dlsposed of / l ' t gm! \ i i g- gag a m W, W13 irts/i97#3/2008 440,000. /