Disposed

M/S. Goyal Mg Gases Pvt. Ltd. v. Kerala Minerals & Metals Ltd.

Kerala HC5 Oct 2013AR/14/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an arbitration request between a gas company and the state undertaking, the High Court appointed Justice P.Krishnamoorthy as the third arbitrator after the death of a nominated arbitrator and failure of parties to reach consensus.

What did the court decide?

Appointed Justice P.Krishnamoorthy as the third arbitrator; directed parties to consult with nominated arbitrators to finalize arbitration terms.

M/S. Goyal Mg Gases Pvt. Ltd. Vs Kerala Minerals & Metals Ltd. — Arbitration | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

SATURDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2013/13TH ASWINA, 1935

¶5

AR.No. 14 of 2013

¶6

PETITIONER(S):PETITIONER:

¶7

M/S. GOYAL MG GASES PVT. LTD., 53 FRIENDS COLONY (EAST), NEW DELHI-110 065.

¶8

BY SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN,SENIOR ADVOCATE ADV. SRI.S.SUJIN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):RESPONDENT:

¶10

KERALA MINERALS & METALS LIMITED., (A GOVT. OF KERALA UNDERTAKING), SANKARAMANGALAM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM, KERALA-691 583.

¶11

BY SRI.B.S.KRISHNAN,SENIOR ADVOCATE,SC ADV. SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN

¶12

THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-10-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

Kss

AR.NO.14/2013

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE:

¶17

ANNEX.A1: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DTD.27/03/2006 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT.

¶18

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: N I L

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

Kss

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶23

¶24

Arbitration Request No. 14 OF 2013

¶25

- - - - Dated this the 5^th day of October, 2013

¶26

ORDER

¶27

The petitioner Company was awarded a work contract by the respondent, pursuant to the tender invited way back in the year 2005, for setting up of 200 TDP Oxygen Plant on 'Build, Own, Operate' basis at the Titanium Di-oxide pigment plant at Sankaramangalam, Chavara, Kollam. Pursuant to this, Ext.P1 agreement was entered into between the petitioner and the respondent on 27/03/2006 and an advance of Rs. 5 crores was released to the petitioner, on furnishing Bank Guarantee for the requisite amount.

¶28

The crux of the pleadings reveal that the work could not be completed due to various reasons and there arose a dispute between the petitioner and respondent. By virtue of the enabling clause in the Arbitration Agreement, the dispute was sought to be resolved by way of 'Arbitration'. The petitioner nominated Justice Chopra, a retired Judge of the Delhi High Court, to be the Arbitrator on their side, while,

¶29

the respondent chose to nominate Justice Rajendra Babu, a retired

¶30

AR.No.14/2013 2

¶31

Judge of this Court. Both the Arbitrators chose to appoint Justice K.K.Narendran, a retired Judge of this Court, as the 'Third Arbitrator' and the matter was being proceeded accordingly. In the meanwhile, the third Arbitrator bid farewell to this world, resulting in a vacuum. Despite the best efforts taken by the petitioner and the respondent, they could not arrive at consensus with regard to the 'Third Arbitrator' and hence the present proceedings before this Court.

¶32

Heard Sri.N.N.Sugunapalan, the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.K.Anand, the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds it fit and proper to appoint Justice P.Krishnamoorthy, a retired Judge of the Karnataka High Court,

¶33

as the 'Third Arbitrator' to deal with the issue and finalise the proceedings accordingly. It is for the 'Third Arbitrator' to draw the terms of Arbitration in consultation with the Arbitrators already nominated by the petitioner and the respondent.

¶34

Arbitration Request is disposed of as above.

¶35

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE

¶36

sv.

¶37

AR.No.14/2013 3

M/S. Goyal Mg Gases Pvt. Ltd. v. Kerala Minerals & Metals Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Goyal Mg Gases Pvt. Ltd. v. Kerala Minerals & Metals Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.V. Krishnakumar Vs M.S. Jaya

Aleena Achi Joseph Vs the Commissioner for Entrance Examination

Muhammed Sabir Vs State of Kerala

Praveen Joseph Vs the District Collector,Palakkad & Anr.

Sasikumar Vs State of Kerala

Shinu Hariharan Vs the Secretary, Rayamangalam Grama Panchayath