AHOM TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD. Appearance: SHASHVATA U SHUKLA(8069) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 DHRUVIK K PATEL(7769) for the Respondent(s) No. 1 ARAVIND KUMAR Date : 04/10/2022 ORAL ORDER 1. Petitioner is seeking for appointment of a sole arbitrator by invoking section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short). 2. Petitioner and respondent entered into a Master Services Agreement on 25.08.2018 for developing "Computer Based Testing Software" ('CBT' for short). Petitioner paid a sum of Rs. 22,17,500/ to respondent on 26.03.2019. As agreed to under the agreement, respondent was supposed to have completed the Page 1 of 14 Downloaded on : Sun Dec 25 03:20:02 IST 2022 C/ARBI.P/204/2021 ORDER DATED: 04/10/2022 development of software by April, 2019 and the one which was provided subsequently was said to be with defects and errors. Petitioner claims to have demanded the respondent to remove the defects and it was not attended to by the respondent. Hence, petitioner is said to have made attempts to arrive at a settlement with the respondent which was not successful after having made all reasonable attempts, petitioner got issued a legal notice invoking arbitration clause 11.3 of the agreement and suggesting the name of the Arbitrator for resolving the disputes that has arisen between parties. 3. Petitioner claims that negotiations were held during December, 2019 and in one such negotiation held on 11.12.2019, respondent agreed for a new timeline to complete the contract which was not met with and immediately thereafter petitioner paid a sum of Rs. 33,40,000/ to the respondent on 19.12.2019. In order to settle the issue with the respondent, petitioner is said to have engaged a third party expert at its costs for code Page 2 of 14 Downloaded on : Sun Dec 25 03:20:02 IST 2022 C/ARBI.P/204/2021 ORDER DATED: 04/10/2022 review and technical walkthrough and despite having several meetings between the respondent and the technical expert, there was no satisfactory reply received from the respondent. 4. Respondent is said to have got issued a legal notice on 07.09.2020 making certain demands resulting in a meeting being arranged on 16.09.2020, whereunder parties agreed for a fresh payment schedule on the condition that respondent would remove all the technical glitches and errors to the satisfaction of the petitioner in finalizing the CBT. Notwithstanding the same, petitioner got issued a reply notice on 17.10.2020 to the respondent to the legal notice dated 07.09.2020 by denying the contentions raised therein. Petitioner is said to have received an intimation / communication from Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, Haryana, whereunder petitioner was called upon to make payment of Rs. 1,25,69,950/ said to be the amount due from petitioner to the respondent. Petitioner is said to have Page 3 of 14 Downloaded on : Sun Dec 25 03:20:02 IST 2022 C/ARBI.P/204/2021 ORDER DATED: 04/10/2022 responded to the said notice on 22.01.2021 and placed all the relevant facts before Facilitation Council and denied the claim of the respondent. Petitioner is also said to have highlighted the payment schedule agreed to at the meeting held on 16.09.2020 which was conditional upon respondent removing the e