The Karnataka High Court examined an arbitration request filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act. The court appointed Sri. N. Sukumaran as the arbitrator after the parties agreed on appointment but failed to suggest names.
Sri. N. Sukumaran was appointed as the Arbitrator to resolve disputes between the petitioner and the respondents.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2012/11TH JYAISHTA 1934
AR.No. 9 of 2012
PETITIONER:
M/S. SHWAS HOMES PVT. LTD., HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT KANIYAMPUZHA ROAD, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM, REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.SREENI PARAMESWARAN, AGED 36, S/O.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, RESIDING AT KANIYAMPUZHA ROAD, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR), SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH).
RESPONDENTS:
1. T.K. SANALKUMAR, S/O.KUMARAN, THANDASSERY HOUSE, VILLA NO.12, SKYLINE CRYSTAL WATERS COMPOUND, MASTER ROAD, VADUTHALA P.O., ERNAKULAM- 19.
2. JOSEPH DCUNJA,
S/O.SUNNY DCUNJA, PANDARAPARAMBIL, AZHEEKAL P.O, MURUKUMPADAM DESOM, PUTHUVYPE VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 510.
3. AJITH KUMAR PATTATH,
R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI.
THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
A.R. NO.9/2012:
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE I: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE RESPONDENTS HEREIN DTD. 29/05/2006. ANNEXURE II: COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 07/07/2010. ANNEXURE III: COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE OF THE RESPONDENTS DTD. 18/07/2011.
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE.
Prv.
ANTONY DOMINIC,J
A.R.No. 9 of 2012
Dated this the 1st day of June, 2012
JUDGMENT
Annexure-1 is an agreement between the petitioner and respondents 1 to 3. Clause 16 of the agreement provides for resolution of disputes by way of arbitration. It appears that disputes arose between the parties and on behalf of the petitioner, Annexure-II notice was issued, calling upon the respondents to agree for the arbitrator suggested by them. To that, Annexure-III reply was given. In the reply, the respondents expressed their unwillingness to accept the Arbitrator suggested in Annexure-II notice. It is in such circumstances, the application has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
A.R.No. 9 of 2012 2
by the parties. Accordingly, I appoint Sri.N. Sukumaran, Sukumar Associates, Triveni, Warriam Road, Cochin-16 as the Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the petitioner and the respondents. The arbitrator shall fix his terms and commence arbitration as expeditiously as possible.
The Arbitration Request is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
ln
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Court has jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator under Section 11(6) when parties fail to suggest names.
Which arbitrator should be appointed when the parties agree to one but fail to suggest names.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/S. SHWAS HOMES PVT. LTD.
T.K. SANALKUMAR
JOSEPH DCUNJA
AJITH KUMAR PATTATH
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
