Allowed

Crystal Granites Limited v. the Joint General Manager

Kerala HC2 Dec 2022AR/158/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In AR 158 of 2022, the High Court of Kerala, Ernakulam, appointed a sole arbitrator to resolve a commercial dispute arising from a supply agreement between Crystal Granites Limited and Simplex Infrastructure Limited. The respondent failed to reply to the arbitration notice.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Sri. S. Prasanth as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute.

Crystal Granites Limited Vs the Joint General Manager — Arbitration | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
AR NO. 158 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER

¶6

CRYSTAL GRANITES LIMITED
CHULLY P.O., THATTUPARA,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA-683581
REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR
SRI. GEORGE ANTONY

¶7

BY ADVS.
N.JAMES KOSHY
T.SANJAY
MIDHUN R.

¶8

RESPONDENT

¶9

THE JOINT GENERAL MANAGER
SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,
COCHIN SHIPYARD PROJECT, N WILLINGTON ISLAND,
KOCHI, PIN - 682003

¶10

THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶11

02.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

A.R.No.158 of 2022

O R D E R

Dated this the 2^nd day of December, 2022

¶16

The petitioner, a company engaged in the manufacture of granite, G-Sand and other granite aggregates, entered into Annexure-2 agreement with the respondent. The agreement was for the supply of crushed stone aggregates and G-Sand.

¶17

The petitioner states that the petitioner supplied crushed stones, but the respondent failed in paying the amounts. Clause 11 of Annexure-2 provides that the disputes arising out of the agreement and consequent supply shall be resolved by mutually agreed Arbitrator in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and principal place of such arbitration will be at Ernakulam.

¶18

In view of the Arbitration Clause, the petitioner sent Annexure-7 arbitration notice on 23.02.2022. The respondent did not respond to Annexure-7 notice, contends the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner is before this Court invoking Section

¶19

A.R.No.158 of 2022

¶20

¶21

11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking to appoint an Arbitrator.

¶22

Though notice was served on the respondent and the counsel representing the respondent appeared on 18.11.2022 and sought time to file Vakalath, the counsel was not present on the next posting date which was on 25.11.2022. Today also, the respondent has not appeared through counsel.

¶23

In view of the pleadings in the Arbitration Request, it is evident that Clause 11 of Annexure-2 agreement contemplates resolution of disputes between the petitioner and the respondent through arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Annexure-2 would also indicate that the seat of Arbitration should be Ernakulam. The petitioner has sent statutory notice to the respondent as is evidenced from Annexure-7. The respondent has not sent any reply to Annexure-7.

¶24

In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the view that an Arbitrator shall be appointed as prayed for by the petitioner to resolve the disputes between the

A.R.No.158 of 2022

parties.

The Arbitration Request is therefore ordered as follows:

¶29

(i) Sri.S.Prasanth, Advocate, Naduviladath, Punnackal, Elamakkara P.O., Cochin-26 is appointed as the sole Arbitrator, to arbitrate upon the disputes that have arisen between the petitioner and the respondent arising out of Annexure-2.

¶30

(ii) The learned Arbitrator is at liberty to rule on his own jurisdiction, if the parties raise such a dispute.

¶31

(iii) The Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator within a period of ten days from today and to obtain a Statement of Disclosure from the learned Arbitrator as provided under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Act.

¶32

(iv) Once the Disclosure Statement is obtained from the learned Arbitrator, the Registry shall issue the certified copy of this order to the learned Arbitrator, with a copy of the said statement appended to it, retaining the original of the same by this Court.

¶33

(v) The fees of the learned Arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth Schedule of the Act.

¶34

(vi) The learned Arbitrator shall decide the manner in which the fees and expenses of the arbitration proceeding has to be paid by the parties.

¶35

A.R.No.158 of 2022

¶36

¶37

(vii) The parties will appear before the learned Arbitrator on such date and place as decided by the learned Arbitrator.

¶38

(viii) All contentions of the parties are left open to be raised before the learned Arbitrator.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

smm

A.R.No.158 of 2022

APPENDIX OF AR 158/2022

¶45

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

¶46

Annexure1TRUE COPY OF THE UDYAM REGISTRATION
CERTIFICATE NO. UDYAM - KL- 020008122
DATED 02.11.1998 ISSUED BY THE MSME,
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA IN FAVOUR OF THE
PETITIONER
Annexure2TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED
29.06.2019ACCEPTANCENO.
GK/3346/QUOTATIONS BY THE PETITIONER TO
THE RESPONDENT
Annexure3TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ADMITTED
DUES PAYABLE TO THE PETITIONER BY THE
RESPONDENT
Annexure4TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE
DETAILS OF THE AMOUNT DUE TO THE
PETITIONER FROM THE RESPONDENT AS ON
08.02.2022
Annexure5TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BY EMAIL
DATED 12.02.2022 SENT BY PETITIONER TO
RESPONDENT
Annexure6TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P. C
NO. 6724/2022 DATED 02.03.2022
Annexure7TRUE COPY OF THE SAID NOTICE 23.02.2022
SENT U/S 11 OF THE ARBITRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT 1996 TO THE RESPONDENT
BY THE PETITIONER

Crystal Granites Limited v. the Joint General Manager

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Crystal Granites Limited v. the Joint General Manager

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

Fathima Shaniba Vs Bijumon

Sasidharan C. Vs State of Kerala

Somasekharan Nair Vs Nellikuzhy Grama Panchayat

Crosslite Infra Private Limited Vs Pravsha Projects Private Limited

G.K.Granites Vs the Joint General Manager

Black Diamond Rock Products LLP Vs State of Kerala