Disposed

Anju M.S. v. Christopher Shaji

Kerala HC13 Mar 2024AR/38/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A dispute arising from a house construction agreement led to an arbitration request filed by the builder's wife on her husband's authorisation. The respondent objected that the petitioner was not a party to the agreement but did not dispute the arbitration clause. The court appointed a sole arbitrator, leaving representation questions to him.

What did the court decide?

Appointed Adv.R.V.Sreejith as sole arbitrator; disclosure statement required before release of certified copy; fees per Fourth Schedule.

Anju M.S. Vs Christopher Shaji — Arbitration | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 13^TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 23RD PHALGUNA, 1945

¶5

AR NO. 38 OF 2024

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ANJU M.S. AGED 37 YEARS, W/O RAJESH R. NAIR, 'RAJDEEP' 16TH MILSETONE, THONNAKKAL POST, MELTHONNAKKAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695317

¶8

BY ADVS. V.K.BALACHANDRAN M.DINESH AMRUTHA P.S.

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

CHRISTOPHER SHAJI AGED 50 YEARS

¶11

FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE APPLICANT. BETHEL, T C, 61/2147(1) VIZHINJAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695521

¶12

BY ADV NAVEEN RADHAKRISHNAN

¶13

THIS ARBITRATION REQUEST HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

AR NO. 38 OF 2024

T.R. RAVI, J.

A. R. No.38 of 2024

Dated this the 13 th day of March, 2024

¶19

ORDER

¶20

The application has been filed by the wife of one Rajesh R Nair,

¶21

who has entered into Annexure A1 agreement with the respondent for the construction of a house in the property. The dispute arises from the said agreement. The respondent has entered appearance and submits that the arbitration clause is not disputed but the agreement is not one in which the petitioner is a party. It is hence submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to invoke the arbitration clause. The petitioner has specifically stated in the request that her husband has authorised her to prefer this request.

¶22

2 . In the above circumstances, I do not think that the contention raised by the respondent should be considered at this stage and it is for the Arbitrator to ensure that the parties are properly represented during the arbitration, particularly since the respondent has in Annexure A4 letter agreed formally for appointment of Adv.R.V.Sreejith as the sole Arbitrator.

¶23

The following orders are hence passed.

¶24

(a) I nominate Mr.R.V.Sreejith, Advocate, 2^nd Floor, Kallath

¶25

AR NO. 38 OF 2024

¶26

¶27

Apartments, M.M.Road, Ernakulam – 682018 as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate and resolve the disputes and differences between the parties to this case arising from Annexure A1 agreement.

¶28

(b) The Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this

¶29

order to the learned Arbitrator, within a period of two weeks from

¶30

today and to obtain a Statement of Disclosure from him under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶31

(c) Once the Disclosure Statement is obtained from the learned Arbitrator, the Registry shall release the certified copy of this order, with a copy of the said statement appended to it, retaining the original of the same on the files of this case.

¶32

(d) The fees of the Arbitrator shall be governed by the Fourth schedule to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Sd/-

T.R. RAVI JUDGE

AR NO. 38 OF 2024

¶37

¶38

APPENDIX OF AR 38/2024

¶39

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES

¶40

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DATED 01.02.2023 ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND RESPONDENT ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 09.01.2024 SENT BY APPLICANT TO THE RESPONDENT ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DATED 13.01.2024 SENT BY RESPONDENT THROUGH ADV. ASHOK P NAIR TO THE APPLICANT AND OTHERS ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 19.01.2024 SENT BY APPLICANT THROUGH ADVOCATES M. DINESH AND V.K. BALACHANDRAN TO ASHOK.P. NAIR, ADVOCATE ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.01.2024 ISSUED BY ADVOCATE ASHOK P. NAIR ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT TO THE COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT

Anju M.S. v. Christopher Shaji

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anju M.S. v. Christopher Shaji

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.Himavarsha Kuries Private Limited (in Liquidation) Vs Komalam.E

M/S.Himavarsha Kuries Private Limited (in Liquidation) Vs Akshay Davis

Josephkutty V.J. Vs Manoj C.N.

State of Kerala Vs v.M.Shajumon

Dhanyan Vs T.K.Dileepkumar

Varindera Constructions Limited Vs Military Engineer Services