Disposed

Prateek Spunfab Private Limited v. United India Insurance Company Limited

Bombay HC8 Aug 2024CARAP/120/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay appointed Mr. P. G. Jagdale as sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act after parties agreed to his appointment. The order stipulated protocols for disclosure, communication, appearances, fees, and venue.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Mr. P. G. Jagdale as sole arbitrator; directions for disclosure, communication, appearances, fees, and venue.

Prateek Spunfab Private Limited vs United India Insurance Company… — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

3-CARAP-120-2024 (OS).doc

¶2

Digitally signed by AMOL AMOL DILIPRAO DILIPRAO NAWALE NAWALE Date: 2024.08.13 19:15:08 +0530

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶4

Commercial Arbitration Application NO. 120 OF 2024

¶5

Prateek Spunfab Private Limited ...Applicant Versus United India Insurance Company Limited ...Respondent

¶6

Adv. Christoper D’souza i/b. Adv. Pradish Suvarna & Adv. Varsh Singh, Advocate for the Applicant.

¶7

Mr. Shreyas Shrivastava a/w. Mr. Anup Kumar Mathur & Mr. Saurabh Shrivastava i/b. Shrivastava Legal, LLP, Advocate for the Respondent.

¶8

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

¶9

DATED : 8 AUGUST, 2024

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

This Commercial Arbitration Application is filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short “Arbitration Act”).

¶12

Between the parties there is a Contract of Insurance (Policy No.1208011120P100484342), dated 18 April 2020 . It contains an arbitration agreement in clause 13.

¶13

Disputes and differences arose between the parties. The Applicant vide its Advocate’s notice dated 22 March 2023 invoked

¶14

¶15

Amol D. Nawale

¶16

3-CARAP-120-2024 (OS).doc

¶17

arbitration under clause 13. As there was no consensus between the parties, the Applicant has filed the present Arbitration Petition, under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act.

¶18

A Court in a Section 11 Application is only required to look at the existence of an arbitration agreement and nothing beyond that.

¶19

The parties have now agreed to appoint Mr. P. G. Jagdale, Retd. Principal District Judge, as Arbitrator to decide their disputes and differences.

¶20

Accordingly, Mr. P. G. Jagdale, Retd. Principal District Judge is appointed as sole arbitrator to decide the disputes and differences between the parties. Hence, the following order:

¶21

(a) Appointment of Arbitrator: Mr. P. G. Jagdale, Retd. Principal District Judge is hereby nominated to act as a Sole Arbitrator to decide the disputes and differences between the parties under Contract of Insurance. It is also clarified that all the issues as raised by the respondent should also be decided by the sole arbitrator while deciding the disputes between the parties.

¶22

(b) Communication to Arbitrator of this order:

¶23

(i) A copy of this order will be communicated to the learned Sole Arbitrator by the Advocates for the applicant within one week from the date of this order is uploaded.

¶24

(ii) In addition, within one week of this order being

¶25

¶26

Amol D. Nawale

¶27

3-CARAP-120-2024 (OS).doc

¶28

uploaded, the Registry will forward an ordinary copy of this order to the learned Sole Arbitrator at the following postal and email addresses:

¶29

Name of Arbitrator : Mr. P. G. Jagdale (Retd. Principal District & Sessions Judge)

¶30

Office Address : Ground Floor, Old Oriental Building, 65 M.G. Road, Fountain, Mumbai. Contact Nos. : 9822373018,02240133018 E-mail Address : [email protected]

¶31

(c) Disclosure: The learned Sole Arbitrator is requested to forward the necessary statement of disclosure under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Arbitration Act to the Prothonotary and Senior Master of this Court, referencing this arbitration application, as soon as possible, and in any case sufficiently before entering upon the reference to arbitration. That statement will be retained by the Prothonotary and Senior Master on the file of this application. Copies will be given to both sides.

¶32

(d) Appearance before the Arbitrator: Parties will appear before the learned Sole Arbitrator on such date and at such place as the learned Sole Arbitrator nominates to obtain appropriate directions in regard to fixing a schedule for completing pleadings, etc.

¶33

(e) Contact/communication information of the parties: Contact and communication particulars are to be provided by both sides to the learned Sole Arbitrator within one week of this order being uploaded. The information is to include a valid and functional

¶34

¶35

Amol D. Nawale

¶36

3-CARAP-120-2024 (OS).doc

¶37

email address.

¶38

(f) Interim Application/s:

¶39

(i) Liberty to the parties to make an interim application or interim applications including (but not limited to) interim application under Section 17 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 before the learned Sole Arbitrator.

¶40

(ii) Any such application if preferred will be decided in such manner and within such time as the learned Sole Arbitrator deems fit.

¶41

(g) Fees: The arbitral tribunal’s fees shall be governed by the Bombay High Court (Fee Payable to Arbitrators) Rule, 2018.

¶42

(h) Sharing of costs and fees: Parties agree that all arbitral costs and the fees of the arbitrator will be borne by the two sides in equal share in the first instance.

¶43

(i) Consent to an extension if thought necessary: Parties immediately consent to a further extension of up to six months to complete the arbitration, should the learned Sole Arbitrator find it necessary.

¶44

(j) Venue and seat of arbitration: Parties agree that the venue and seat of the arbitration will be in Mumbai.

¶45

The Commercial Arbitration Application is disposed of.

¶46

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)

¶47

¶48

Amol D. Nawale

Prateek Spunfab Private Limited v. United India Insurance Company Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prateek Spunfab Private Limited v. United India Insurance Company 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Snehalkumar Ashwinbhai Savani vs State of Maharashtra

Pramodprasad S Semalty vs State of Maharashtra

Neelambari Abhijet Desai vs Abhijeet Ashok Desai

Subodh Kumar Goel vs State of Maharashtra

Ramesh Harakchand Gada and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra

Suraj Balai Pramanik vs State of Maharashtra