Arbitration Case No.220 of 2006 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Arbitration Case No.220 of 2006 Date of Decision: 29 - 01 - 2008 Punjab Agro Industries Corporation Limited ....Petitioner through Mr.N.S.Boparai, Advocate v. Meena Mehta and others ....Respondents through : Nemo CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE VIJENDER JAIN, CHIEF JUSTICE *** 1. Whether Reporters of Local Newspapers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? *** VIJENDER JAIN, CHIEF JUSTICE (ORAL) This petition under Section 14(1)(a) & (2) read with Section 15(2) and Section 11(6)(a) & (c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed by the petitioner for terminating the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal and appointment of sole Arbitrator by this Court. Briefly stating, the facts are that a contract agreement was entered into between the parties containing the arbitration clause on 4.3.1994, which is to the following effect:- “36. All differences and disputes between the parties hereto on any clause or matter herein contained or their respective rights, claims or Arbitration Case No.220 of 2006 [2] liabilities hereunder or otherwise, howsoever, in relation to or arising out of this agreement, shall be referred to arbitration by two Arbitrators (one to be appointed by each party) who shall, before proceeding with the reference, appoint an Umpire and such arbitration shall be governed by the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 or any modification or re-enactment thereof for the time being in force.” Pursuant to the said agreement the petitioner appointed respondent No.4 as its Arbitrator. Respondent No.1 appointed Col. J.S.Saini as Arbitrator on her behalf. However, there was no consensus on the name for appointment of an Umpire and for that purpose a petition was filed in the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh. Learned Additional District Judge vide order dated 15.10.2004, Annexure P-6, appointed respondent No.2 as the Umpire. It is the case of the petitioner that respondent No.3, in spite of letters being sent to him which are Annexures P-7 to P-11, did not participate in the arbitration proceedings. Ultimately, upon a telephone call made by the Umpire to respondent No.3 to know the reason for his not coming to join the arbitration proceedings, respondent No.3 informed that he has been instructed by respondent No.1 not to attend the arbitration proceedings. The petitioner has placed on record that communication vide Annexure P-14. When nothing was forthcoming, the petitioner was constrained to file the present petition on 9.8.2007. Notice of this petition was issued. No body appeared on behalf of the respondents. This Court directed the respondents to be served by substituted service. The petitioner took steps and served the respondents by substituted service in `Punjab Kesri' (Ludhiana Edition) and `The Tribune' (Chandigarh Edition) on 17.12.2007. No body is present on behalf of the respondents in spite of substituted service having been effected in `Punjab Kesri' (Ludhiana Edition) and `The Tribune' (Chandigarh Edition). Arbitration Case No.220 of 2006 [3] I have perused the record. It seems that respondent No.1 is not interested in persuing the arbitration proceedings and the Arbitral Tribunal cannot function. Therefore, I terminate the mandate of Arbitral Tribunal and appoint Justice S.K.Jain (a retired Judge) as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon all the disputes between the parties. The Arbitrator shall fix his own fee. The intimation of appointment shall be sent to the Arbitrator by the Registry. Parties to appear before the Arbitrator on 7.3.2008 at 4.00 P.M. Petition stands disposed of. ( VIJENDER JAIN ) January 29, 2008 CHIEF JUSTICE RC