Allowed

Kunnel Engineers and Contractors Private Ltd. v. Chennai Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd.

Kerala HC4 Apr 2013AR/50/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application sought the appointment of an Arbitrator under Section 11 of the 1996 Act for a contract dispute. The respondent did not oppose the appointment. The Court appointed Smt. Lizamma Augustine as the Arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Smt. Lizamma Augustine, Moonjappilly, Kochi, as Arbitrator to resolve disputes between the parties.

Kunnel Engineers and Contractors Private Ltd. Vs Chennai… — Arbitration | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF APRIL 2013/14TH CHAITHRA 1935

¶5

AR.No. 50 of 2012 ()

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

KUNNEL ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PRIVATE LTD. REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR M.V.ANTONY SON OF LATE M.P.VARGHESE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE, 3RD FLOOR, PUTHURAN PLAZA KPCC JUNCTION , M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM KOCHI -682011.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY SMT.C.G.PREETHA SRI.K.V.GEORGE SRI.P.N.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

CHENNAI ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS PVT. LTD. REGISTERED OFFICE 2/2 BALARAMAN ROAD, ADYAR CHENNAI 600 020 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH

¶12

THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-04-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

AR.No. 50 of 2012 ()

¶14

APPENDIX

¶15

PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:

¶16

ANNEX.A1:	COPY OF AGREEMENT DATED 17.11.2011 EXECUTED BETWEEN PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT.
ANNEX.A2:	COPY OF EMAIL DATED 13.02.2012 SENT BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
ANNEX.A3:	COPY OF LETTER NO.KEC/CECPL/1056/2011-12 DATED 19.03.2012 SENT BY PETITIONER TO RESPONDENT.
ANNEX.A4:	COPY OF LETTER NO.KEC/CECPL/126/2012-13 DATED 19.05.2012 SENT BY PETITIONER TO RESPONDENT.
ANNEX.A5:	COPY OF LETTER DATED 02.06.2012 SENT BY THE RESPONDENT TO PETITIONER.
ANNEX.A6:	COPY OF REPLY NO.KEC/CECPL/251/2012-13 DATED 04.07.2012 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT.
ANNEX.A7:	COPY OF UNCLAIMED POSTAL COVER RETURNED UNSERVED ON THE RESPONDENT.
ANNEX.A8:	COPY OF POSTAL COVER RETURNED UNSERVED ON THE RESPONDENT'S DIRECTOR, MR.H.MASQOOTH ALI.
ANNEX.A9:	COPY OF POSTALCOVER RETURNED UNSERVED ON THE RESPONDENT'S DIRECTOR, MRS.FATHIMA ALI.

¶17

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

SKV

ANTONY DOMINIC, J

A.R.50/2012

Dated this the 4^th day of April, 2013

¶26

¶27

ORDER

¶28

Annexure-A1 is an agreement between the applicant and the respondent in relation to certain civil works that was awarded to the applicant. According to the applicant, later the work was abandoned by the respondent as a result, they were entitled to certain monetary claims. Since clause 54 of Annexure-A1 provides that, disputes between the parties are to be resolved by way of arbitration, applicant issued Annexure-A6 notice invoking arbitration clause and suggesting an Arbitrator. Although the respondent was requested to confirm their agreement to the Arbitrator suggested, there was no response from the respondent. It was in these circumstances this Arbitration Request is filed before this Court invoking the provisions of Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and seeking appointment of an Arbitrator.

¶29

Heard the learned counsel for the respondent also.

¶30

A.R.50/12

¶31

¶32

Respondent submitted that they are willing to have the disputes arbitrated by an Arbitrator to be appointed by this Court.

¶33

Thus, the parties are in agreement about the existence of

¶34

dispute and requirement of an Arbitrator to resolve the same.

¶35

In view of the above, this Arbitration Request is disposed of appointing Smt.Lizamma Augustine, Moonjappilly,

¶36

Providence Road, Kochi-682 018, as an Arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties. Arbitrator will commence proceedings and conclude the same as expeditiously as possible.

¶37

Registry will communicate this order to the Arbitrator for taking further action in the matter.

¶38

Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

¶39

mrcs

¶40

/true copy/

¶41

sd/- P.A. To Judge

Kunnel Engineers and Contractors Private Ltd. v. Chennai Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunnel Engineers and Contractors Private Ltd. v. Chennai Engineers and Contractors Pvt. 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

Abdul Majeed C.K. Vs the Joint Regional Transport Officer, Perumbavoor

K.V. Sanathanan Vs the Tahsildar

T.S.Santhosh Vs M/S.Tamil Nadu Mercantile

Amma Center for Diagnosis and Preventive Medicine (P0 Ltd. Vs Kims Hospital and Surgical Centre

R.Padmini Vs State of Kerala and Others

B.A Ahraf Vs State of Kerala