Allowed

Vasant Dhondiba Gawade v. Sangita Atul Girme

Bombay HC18 Jan 2023ARP/20/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court appointed Advocate D. V. Sarolkar as the sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, after parties failed to reach a consensus within the agreed procedure in an arbitration petition filed before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of D. V. Sarolkar as sole arbitrator; direction to submit consent and disclosure statement within four weeks.

Vasant Dhondiba Gawade Vs Sangita Atul Girme — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

28_ARP_20_21.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 20 OF 2021

¶3

Vasant Dhondiba Gawade … Petitioner vs. Sangita Atul Girme … Respondent

¶4

Mr. Tejas Kapre for petitioner.

¶5

Mr. S. R. Nargolkar a/w. Mr. Arjun Kadam for respondent.

¶6

CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J DATE : 18^th JANUARY, 2023

¶7

P.C. :

¶8

. This petition is filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for appointment of arbitrator, in the context of arbitration clause, contained in Partnership Deed dated 29^th November, 2007.

¶9

The petitioner claims that due to disputes arising between the parties, after issuing initial notice for resolution of dispute, on 10^th November, 2020, the petitioner was constrained to issue notice, invoking the arbitration clause and also, suggesting the name of an arbitrator. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there was response sent on behalf of the respondent through advocate, but there was no consensus on appointment of arbitrator.

¶10

This Court issued notice in the present petition and the respondent has appeared through counsel. The existence of the arbitration clause is not denied and it also cannot be denied that by notice dated 10^th November, 2020, the arbitration clause was invoked. The procedure agreed between the parties did not result in the appointment of arbitrator. In such circumstances, this Court is entitled to exercise jurisdiction for appointment of arbitrator.

¶11

1/2

¶12

28_ARP_20_21.doc

¶13

In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that since the dispute pertains to the city of Pune, it would be appropriate that an arbitrator available at Pune is appointed for resolution of disputes.

¶14

Accordingly, Advocate D. V. Sarolkar is appointed as the sole arbitrator for resolution of disputes between the parties. Details of the learned arbitrator are as follows:-

¶15

301, Gopalkrupa Apartment, Revenue Colony, Near Jangli Maharaj Temple, Pune.

¶16

Mob.: 98220 43484

¶17

Parties undertake to inform the learned arbitrator immediately about the order passed today.

¶18

The learned arbitrator is requested to submit his consent and disclosure statement in terms of Sections 11(8) and 12(1) of the aforesaid Act within four weeks from today to the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. The fees of the learned arbitrator shall be as per the Fourth Schedule to the said Act.

¶19

All questions are left open to be decided by the learned arbitrator.

¶20

The petition stands disposed of.

¶21

(MANISH PITALE, J)

¶22

Priya Kambli

¶23

2/2

Vasant Dhondiba Gawade v. Sangita Atul Girme

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vasant Dhondiba Gawade v. Sangita Atul Girme

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

Balaso Marutirao Gaikwad (Deceased) Thr. Lrs.Shri Yuvraj Balaso Gaikwad and Others Vs M/S. Shetke Builders and Developers and Others

Balaso Marutirao Gaikwad (Deceased) Thr. Lrs.Shri Yuvraj Balaso Gaikwad and Others Vs M/S. Shetke Builders and Developers and Others

Mohdateeque Mohdismail Momin vs Hdfc Bank Ltd., through Legal Manager

Jayashree Vasant Gawade Vs Atul Kisanrao Girme

Jayashree Vasant Gawade Vs Atul Kisanrao Girme

Ajay Rameshwar Agrawal Vs Shri Sudhakar Ramdayal Behede Prop.of M/S. Behede Brothers