Shri Pratap Sindhu Vs Sh Sumit Mathur

This application has been filed by the petitioner seeking appointment of a Substitute Arbitrator in place of the Arbitrator appointed by this Court vide its order dated 03.12.2018.

¶11

It is contended that as the appointed Arbitrator has been appointed as a member in the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai, she has expressed her inability to act as an Arbitrator.

¶12

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a copy of this application was duly served on the respondent. I may only note that the earlier order dated 03.12.2018 was also passed ex-parte with the respondent not entering appearance. I, therefore, do not see any necessity of issuing any further notice of this application to the respondent.

¶13

In view of the above, while terminating the mandate of the Arbitrator appointed vide order dated 03.12.2018, I appoint Mr.S.K. Tandon , Retired

¶14

Additional District & Sessions Judge, Delhi (244, Bank Enclave, Near Laxmi Nagar, Delhi- 110092, Ph: 9811719888, 9717703864, 22048590) as a Substitute Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties.

¶15

The Arbitrator shall give disclosure under Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before proceeding with the reference. The application is allowed in the above terms. Dasti.

¶16

NAVIN CHAWLA, J

¶17

JANUARY 25, 2019/Arya

Shri Pratap Sindhu v. Sh Sumit Mathur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Pratap Sindhu v. Sh Sumit Mathur

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

K.C. Fibers Limited Vs Union of India & Ors.

Gaurav Varmani Vs Trinity Touch Private Limited

Hamid Baig Vs Nitin Gulati

S P Singla Constructions Private Limited Vs Steel Authority of India Limited & Anr.

Adrin Pal Dheer Vs Northern Railway

Pratap Sindhu Vs Sumit Mathur