Allowed

M/s Midmark India (Private) Ltd. through its Ar, Mr. Praveen Kale v. U.P. Skill Development Mission (Upsdm) through its Mission Director, Lucknow

Allahabad HC25 Jul 2024/84/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court appointed Mr. Justice Harsh Kumar as arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 after the respondent failed to participate. The order also directs the applicant to file a paper-book for the arbitrator's consent. The application was subsequently disposed of.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Mr. Justice Harsh Kumar (retd.) as Arbitrator; disposal of the application.

M/s Midmark India (Private) Ltd. through its Ar, Mr. Praveen… — Arbitration | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- CIVIL MISC. ARBITRATION APPLICATION No. - 84 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- M/S Midmark India (Private) Ltd. Through Its Ar, Mr. Praveen Kale Opposite Party :- U.P. Skill Development Mission (Upsdm) Through Its Mission Director, Lucknow Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Jaiswal

¶4

Hon'ble Rajnish Kumar,J.

¶5

Heard.

¶6

This Court had passed the following order on 29.05.2024:-

¶7

"1. Heard Sri Amit Jaiswal, learned counsel for the petitioner. None has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents.

¶8

2. The record indicates that notices were issued to the respondents by means of order dated 07.11.2023.

¶9

3. As per the office report, the service on the respondent is sufficient despite the same, none has put in appearance and this fact was also recorded by a coordinate Bench of this Court in its order dated 24.04.2024.

¶10

4. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking appointment of a sole Arbitrator and it is stated that an agreement is entered between the petitioner and the respondent dated 29.12.2018 in pursuance whereof the petitioner was required to provide skilled training programme for school and colleges and dropped out persons, for unemployed youth of the State.

¶11

5. It is further stated that the petitioner worked under the said agreement, however, when it came to the respondents to make the payments, it is at that point of time that they maintained silence and thus the disputes arose between the parties.

¶12

6. The petitioner being aggrieved invoked the arbitration clause contained in Clause 17 of the agreement dated 29.12.2018 by means of its notice dated 18.08.2023, a cop of which has been brought on record as Annexure No. 5.

¶13

7. It is further submitted that apart from delienating the claims, the petitioner also proposed the name of an Arbitrator and sought the consent of the respondents. Despite being noticed, no response was given by the respondents as such the process for appointment of Arbitrator as agreed, failed. In the aforesaid backdrop, the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶14

8. Since none has put in appearance on behalf of the respondents, this Court having taken note of the facts and circumstances as well as the material on record finds that the agreement dated 29.12.2018 signed by the parties contained an arbitration clause which has been invoked by means of a letter dated 18.08.2023 and despite notice none has responded, accordingly, the appointment procedure has failed, hence, this Court steps

¶15

in to appoint an Arbitrator in terms of Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶16

9. This Court finds that the matter is a fit case for appointment of an Arbitrator, accordingly, proposes the name of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Harsh Kumar (retd.) Judge of this Court R/o Plot No. 3, Tower-6, Flat No. 704, Alaknanda Enclave Avadh Vihar Yojana, Shaheed Path, Sultanpur Road, Lucknow (226002) (U.P.) Mob No. 9695926197 to act as an Arbitrator.

¶17

10. Learned counsel for the petitioner shall provide a complete set of the paper-book within a week from today with the office of this Court to be sent to the proposed arbitrator to seek his consent under Section 12 (1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶18

11. List this matter on 11th July, 2024."

¶19

In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the consent of the proposed Arbitrator Hon'ble Mr. Justice Harsh Kumar (retd.) Judge of this Court has been received through letter dated 29.05.2024 in accordance with law.

¶20

In view of above, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Harsh Kumar (retd.) Judge of this Court R/o Plot No. 3, Tower-6, Flat No. 704, Alaknanda Enclave Avadh Vihar Yojana, Shaheed Path, Sultanpur Road, Lucknow (226002) (U.P.) Mob No. 9695926197, is hereby appointed as Arbitrator to decide the dispute between the parties.

¶21

Accordingly, the application is disposed of.

¶22

Office is directed to communicate a copy of this order to Hon'ble Mr. Justice Harsh Kumar (retd.) Judge of this Court forthwith.

¶23

Order Date :- 25.7.2024 Raj

¶24

Digitally signed by :- RAJ NIGAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

M/s Midmark India (Private) Ltd. through its Ar, Mr. Praveen Kale v. U.P. Skill Development Mission (Upsdm) through its Mission Director, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Midmark India (Private) Ltd. through its Ar, Mr. Praveen Kale v. U.P. Skill Development Mission (Upsdm) through its Mission Director, Lucknow

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.N. K Spring Andors Vs Dinesh Dutt Tewari

Ram Naresh and Others Vs Tilakram and Others

Moti Lal and Other Vs Om Prakash

Basera City Developers Private Limited, through its Director Sri Anupam Prakash Pandey vs Uttar Pradesh Avas Evam Vikas Parishad through its Housing Commissioner, and Another

Yogendra Pratap @ Manu Babu vs Smt. Mudita and Others

Ramanand and Others vs Addil. District Magistrate / Up Sanchalak Chakbandi, Raibareli and Others