Allowed

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Lloyds Steel Industries Ltd.

Delhi HC14 Jan 2020ARB.P./13/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes between the parties under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, following the withdrawal of the previous arbitrator and consent of both parties.

What did the court decide?

Mr. Justice Manmohan Singh (Retd.) appointed as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate disputes between the parties; his mandate includes giving disclosure under Section 12 of the Act and fees fixed per Fourth

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. Vs Lloyds Steel Industries Ltd. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2020)

¶1

$~A-23

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of decision: 14.01.2020

¶4

- ARB.P. 13/2020 and IA 379/2020

¶5

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD ..... Petitioner Through: Mr. V.N. Koura and Mr. Nikhil Mundeja, Advocates

¶6

Versus

¶7

LLOYDS STEEL INDUSTRIES LTD ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Naresh Thacker and Mr. Avinash Tripathi, Advocates

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI SINGH

¶9

JYOTI SINGH, J. (ORAL)

¶10

This is a petition filed under Section 11(5), (6) and (8) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator. The Arbitration Clause in the agreement between the parties reads as under :-

"9.0.0.0

9.0.1.0

ARBITRATION

Subject to the provisions of Clause 6.7.1.0 and 6.7.2.0 hereof, any dispute or difference between the parties hereto arising out of any notified claim of the Contractor included in his Final Bill in accordance with the precisions of Clause 6.6.3.0 hereof and/or arising out of any amount claimed by the Owner (whether or not the amount claimed by the Owner or any part thereof shall have been deducted from the Final Bill

¶15

Arb. P. 13/2020 Page 1 of 3

¶16

of the Contractor or any amount paid by the Owner to the Contractor in respect of the work) shall be referred to arbitration by a Sale Arbitrator selected by the Contractor from a panel of three persons nominated by the General Manager."

¶17

In connection with the agreement dated 24.11.1994 between the parties, disputes having arisen, a Sole Arbitrator was appointed on 15.10.2009. The present petition has been filed on account of the fact that the learned Arbitrator has withdrawn from the office of the Arbitrator on 02.04.2019.

¶18

Issue notice.

¶19

Mr. Naresh Thacker, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

¶20

Mr. Thacker, on instructions from the respondent, submits that he has no objection to the appointment of an Arbitrator.

¶21

Mr. Koura, appearing for the petitioner submits that as per the agreement, the petitioner is required to give a panel of Arbitrators and the petitioner has accordingly prepared a list of three Arbitrators from which the Sole Arbitrator can be appointed.

¶22

With the consent of the parties, Mr. Justice Manmohan Singh, former Judge of this Court is appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶23

The address and mobile number of the learned Arbitrator is as under:

¶24

Mr. Justice Manmohan Singh (Retd.), Former Judge of Delhi High Court, AB-13, Pandara Road, New Delhi-110003 Mobile: 9717495001

¶25

Arb. P. 13/2020

¶26

Page 2 of 3

¶27

The learned Arbitrator shall give disclosure under Section 12 of the Act before entering upon reference.

¶28

Fee of the Arbitrator shall be fixed as per Fourth Schedule of the Act. 11. Needless to state, the Arbitrator will proceed from the stage the proceedings were left by the earlier Arbitrator. The mandate of the earlier arbitrator Mr. Justice V.S. Aggarwal (Retd.) is terminated.

¶29

The petition is disposed of along with the pending applications in the aforesaid terms.

¶30

JYOTI SINGH, J

¶31

January 14 , 2020 yg/

¶32

Arb. P. 13/2020

¶33

Page 3 of 3

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Lloyds Steel Industries Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Lloyds Steel Industries Ltd.

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 Inter Ads Exhibition Pvt. Ltd. Vs Busworld International Cooperatieve Vennootschap Met Beperkte Anasprakelijkheid

Value Prolific Consulting Services Private Limited Vs the Label Corp Private Limited

China Petroleum Pipeline Bureau Vs Indian Oil Corporation Limited

Itq Consultancy Private Limited (in Vol.Liqn.) Vs ....

Prakash Chand Goyal (Huf) Vs Sunil Walia

Akash Gupta Vs Praveen Kumar Gupta & Ors.