I.A. No.08 of 2019 15. 16.08.2019 Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. I.A. No.08 of 2019 has been filed for appointment of a new Arbitrator in view of the fact that Shri Justice K.P. Mohapatra Arbitrator so appointed pursuant to the order of this Court dated 20.05.2009 has expired in the meantime. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that vide order dated 20.05.2009, this Court appointed Shri Justice K.P. Mohapatra, a former judge of this Court as the Arbitrator, to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. It is submitted that as the Arbitrator has expired, this Court may appoint a substitute Arbitrator in terms of Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for adjudication of the dispute between the parties. 4. On perusal of record, it is seen that as per the agreement, which was entered into between the parties, notice was sent on 26.12.2001 and 29.12.2001 (Annexure-3 and 4 respectively) invoking arbitration and the arbitrator was appointed by this Court with the consent of the parties vide order dated 20.05.2009. However, after appointment of arbitrator, application was filed for recalling the said order of appointment of Arbitrator seriously disputing by learned counsel for the opposite parties-RSP that the counsel, who was given consent and conducting the case for opposite parties was not authorized by the opposite parties-RSP. 5. Perused the records in detail. In my considered opinion, in view of the final order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in Civil Appeal Nos.7605-7606 of 2014, dated 11.08.2014, the Arbitrator was appointed. For ready ARBP No.65 of 2008 -2- reference, the said order dated 11.08.2014 is reproduced hereunder: “Leave granted. 2. These appeals deserve to be allowed on the short ground that although the first recall application made by respondents was dismissed on 3.9.2009, subsequent recall application on the self-same grounds was made on 16.12.2009. The second recall application has been allowed by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice. We are afraid the second recall application by the respondents was an abuse of process of the Court and ought not to have been allowed. When the first recall application was dismissed, the remedy available to the respondents was to challenge that order in appropriate proceedings but that was never done. In our view, it was not open to the respondents to make second application for recalling the orders dated 25.2.2001 and 3.9.2009. 3. Civil Appeals are, accordingly, allowed. The impugned order is set-aside. No order as to costs.” 6. However, unfortunately, the said Arbitrator has expired in the meantime. It appears that the litigation was dragged by the opposite parties with a view to avoid compensation on the flimsy ground that the said arbitration was to be decided within six months. In my opinion, this Court should not be a party to such attempt made by the opposite parties in dragging the proceeding. 7. In that view of the matter, substitution of arbitrator is sine quo non and it has to be substituted immediately. Therefore, I hereby appoint Shri Justice J.P. Das, a former Judge of this Court, as the Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. The venue of the arbitration shall be at High Court of Orissa Arbitration & Mediation Centre, Cuttack. The parties are directed to appear before the Arbitrator and the learned Arbitrator after -3- hearing all the objections and cross objections of the parties shall conclude the proceeding in accordance with law. It is needless to say that the fees of the Arbitrator shall be as per the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015. I.A. is accordingly disposed of. Issue urgent certified copy of this order as per rules. This order be communicated to Shri Justice J.P. Das, forthwith. .…….......……………… ( K.S. Jhaveri ) Chief Justice mp