Allowed

Jayamohan Gopalan v. M/S.Cochin Star Constructions (Star Homes)

Kerala HC25 May 2016AR/54/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed an arbitration request filed by Jayamohan Gopalan under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Upon finding uncontested evidence of arbitration agreements and lack of respondent response, the court appointed T.V. Mammootty as sole arbitrator.

What did the court decide?

Arbitration Request allowed; Sri.T.V.Mammootty appointed as sole Arbitrator.

Jayamohan Gopalan Vs M/S.Cochin Star Constructions (Star Homes) — Arbitration | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2016/4TH JYAISHTA, 1938

¶5

AR.No. 54 of 2014 ()

¶6

APPLICANT:

¶7

JAYAMOHAN GOPALAN, RESIDING AT FLAT NO. R-101, CASA METASU, SILVA NAGAR, PONDA, GOA, PIN-403401.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI SMT.SABINA JAYAN

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. M/S.COCHIN STAR CONSTRUCTIONS (STAR HOMES), SOUTH STAR APARTMENT, OPPOSITE KSRTC BUS STAND, ERNAKULAM, COLLEGE.P.O., COCHIN-682035, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL MANAGER.

¶11

2. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S. COCHIN STAR CONSTRUCTIONS(STAR HOMES), SOUTH STAR APARTMENT, OPP: KSRTC BUS STAND, ERNAKULAM, COLLEGE P.O., COCHIN-682035.

¶12

THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25-05-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

rvs.

¶14

AR.No. 54 of 2014 ()

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶17

ANNEXURE I:	THE TRUE 12/12/200 RESPONDEN	COPY OF THE AGREEMENT FOR SALE DATED 3 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE TS.
ANNEXURE II:	THE TRUE 12/12/200 RESPONDEN	COPY OF AGREEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION DATED 3 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND THE TS.
ANNEXURE III:	THE TRUE BY THE POSTAL RE	COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 16/05/2014 SEND APPLICANT TO THE RESPONDENTS ALONG THE CEIPT.
RESPONDENT(S)'	EXHIBITS :

¶18

NIL. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE rvs.

¶19

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, J.

¶20

Arbitration Request No.54 of 2014

¶21

Dated 25^th May, 2016.

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

This is an Arbitration Request filed under Section 11

¶24

(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

¶25

Though notice was ordered to the respondents, there is no appearance for them.

¶26

The case of the applicant is that the agreement entered into between him and the first respondent for purchase of an apartment contains an arbitration clause and that though he had invoked the said arbitration clause for resolution of the dispute between him and the first respondent, the first respondent is not responding to the demand made by him.

¶27

Clause 22 of Annexure I agreement and Clause 32 of Annexure II agreement indicate beyond doubt that in the event of any dispute between the applicant and the first

¶28

A.R.No.54 of 2014

¶29

¶30

respondent relating to the said agreement, the same shall be referred and resolved through arbitration. Clause 22 of Annexure I agreement and Clause 32 of Annexure II agreement read thus :

¶31

“ 22. In respect of dispute if any, whatsoever nature between the parties relating to this agreement in any matter whatsoever the same shall be referred to SOLE ARBITRATION, to be held in Ernakulam in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act.”

¶32

“ 32. That in the event of any dispute, whatsoever nature between the parties relating to this agreement and implementation, or complaints each other in any matter whatsoever, the same shall be referred to for SOLE ARBITRATION to be held at Ernakulam in accordance with the provisions of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act.”

¶33

5. Annexure III is the communication by which the

¶34

applicant has raised the dispute to be resolved through arbitration. The averment in the application that the first respondent is not responding to Annexure III communication

¶35

A.R.No.54 of 2014

¶36

¶37

stands uncontroverted. In the circumstances, I deem it appropriate to allow the Request.

¶38

In the result, the Arbitration Request is allowed and Sri.T.V.Mammootty, Retired District Judge, M/s.Khalid and Panicker, Nair Samajam Lane, SRM Road, Ernakulam North is appointed as the Arbitrator. The Arbitrator shall commence the proceedings after notice to the parties. It is made clear that the Arbitrator is free to fix his remuneration.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE.

¶41

tgs

¶42

(true copy)

Jayamohan Gopalan v. M/S.Cochin Star Constructions (Star Homes)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayamohan Gopalan v. M/S.Cochin Star Constructions (Star Homes)

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.Sherwood Technocrats Vs State of Kerala

Firdouse International Trading Co. Vs Union of India

Delta Aggregates and Sand Pvt. Ltd. Vs the General Manager

Manu J.Sivadas Vs the Secretary, Central Board of Secondary Education

Bipin Baby Vs the Superintending Engineer

Pullanjiyottu Kizhakke Veettil Kunhi Parvathi Amma Vs the District Collector, Kannur