Disposed

M/S. Dana Anandindia Private Limited Thr. Authorized Representative Ms. Priyanka Agarwal v. M/S. Shrid Metal Technologies Private Limited

Bombay HC3 Apr 2023ARP/51/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this arbitration petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner sought appointment of a sole arbitrator as there was no response from the respondent despite the invocation of the arbitration clause. The High Court appointed Mr. Anurag Jain as the sole arbitrator.

What did the court decide?

Mr. Anurag Jain appointed as sole arbitrator.

M/S. Dana Anandindia Private Limited Thr. Authorized… — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

24_ARP51_22.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ARBITRATION PETITION NO.51 OF 2022

¶4

M/s. Dana AnandIndia Private Limited thr. Authorized Representative Priyanka Agarwal … Petitioner Vs. M/s. Shrid Metal Technologies Private Limited … Respondent

¶5

Mr. Prasad L. Gajbhiye for Petitioner.

¶6

Ms. Sneha Phene a/w. Ms. Rajni Divkar i/b. Mr. Pratik Divkar for Respondent.

¶7

CORAM : MANISH PITALE, J. DATE : APRIL 03, 2023

¶8

P.C. :

¶9

. By this petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioner is seeking appointment of an arbitrator for resolution of disputes. The arbitration clause is contained in a purchasing agreement dated 28.11.2016 executed between the parties. The clause indicates that the arbitration shall take place at Pune.

¶10

As disputes arose between the parties, the petitioner invoked the arbitration clause by issuing notice dated 09.12.2021 to the respondent. It appears that there was no response from the respondent.

¶11

In the present petition, the respondent has appeared through counsel and concedes that there is an arbitration clause and that therefore, the disputes between the parties can be referred to arbitration. There is no consensus on the name of the sole arbitrator.

¶12

In view of the above, Mr. Anurag Jain, Advocate practising at Pune is appointed as the sole arbitrator. The details of the learned arbitrator are as follows:-

¶13

Advocate Anurag Jain 501, Varun Capital, CTS No. 364 + 365/13,

¶14

1/2

¶15

24_ARP51_22.doc

¶16

Next to OYO Citiotel Lane, Opp. Jangli Maharaj Temple, Shivajinagar, Pune - 411 005. Mob.No. : 98337 59856. Email id : [email protected]

¶17

The parties shall communicate this order to the learned arbitrator immediately.

¶18

Learned Arbitrator is requested to communicate his consent and disclosure statement in terms of Section 11(8) and 12(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to the Registrar (Judicial) of this Court, within four weeks from today.

¶19

The fees of the learned arbitrator shall be as per Schedule IV of the Act.

¶20

All questions are kept open.

¶21

The petition stands disposed of.

¶22

(MANISH PITALE, J.)

¶23

Minal Parab

¶24

2/2

M/S. Dana Anandindia Private Limited Thr. Authorized Representative Ms. Priyanka Agarwal v. M/S. Shrid Metal Technologies Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Dana Anandindia Private Limited Thr. Authorized Representative Ms. Priyanka Agarwal v. M/S. Shrid Metal Technologies Private Limited

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

M/S.Bhosale Buttepatil and Associates,Thr.Partners Dhanyakumar Bhosale and Jayaprakash Buttepatil Vs M/S. Maple Ellora Developers, Thr. Partners

Rezual Karim Vs Tata Motors Finance Solution Ltd. and 2 Ors.

Bb Ipr Limited Vs the Registrar of Trade Marks

Credit Suisse Services India Pvt. Ltd. Vs Nisheet Singh

Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. Vs Quest Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.

Travel Food Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Aroon Food Services Pvt. Ltd.