The court appointed an arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from two Joint Venture Agreements under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petition was limited to the petitioner and the first two respondents.
Appointment of Mr. Justice Akbar Ali as arbitrator. Hearing to ascertain if third respondent should be impleaded.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 05.12.2017
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
O.P. No.111 of 2017
M/s.Navaneeth Hotels Private Limited, Rep.by its R.Paramasivam No.54 Mettupalayam Road, G.N.Mills Post, Coimbatore – 641 029 ..... Petitioner Vs. 1M/s.Sivasakthi, a partnership firm 60/4, Narayanasami Road Saibaba Mission P.O., Coimbatore – 641 011. 2. M/s.P.S.Srijan Projects, represented by Partners 36/1A, Elgin Road Kolkatta – 700 020 Also at M/s.P.S.srijan Projects, represeted by Partners, Suite No.10, Block A, 4th Floor, New No.56, Old No.44 Tirumalai Street, T.Nagar, Chennai -17. 3.M/s.V.R.Nachimuthu, a partnership firm Sakthi Enclave 60/5 Narayanasami Road Saibaba Mission PO Coimbatore – 641 011 4.Mr.K.N.V.Ramani Senior Advocate 152 Kailas Road Ram Nagar Coimbatore – 641 009 ..... Respondents Original Petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and
2
Conciliation Act, 1996 praying for appointment of two independent Arbitrator who shall appoint a third Presiding Arbitrator and constitute an Arbitral Tribunal for resolving the various disputes and differences that have arisen between the petitioner and the respondent from and out of the operation of Agreements dated 08.07.2006 and 06.12.2006 and Article 16 and Article 19 of the said Agreements.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Alagu Narayanan
For Respondents : 1 Mr.Kuberan for M/s.Rank Assoc.
for R2
2.Mr.OLV Ganesan for M/s.Ganesh
& Ganesh for R1 and R3.
3. None appeared for R4.
ORDER
This petition is filed by M/s.Navaneeth Hotels Private Limited
seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to settle disputes that have arisen between itself and the respondents arising out two agreements dated
08.07.2006 and 06.12.2006.
3
3.The development was sub-contracted by the first respondent to the second respondent, who entered into a fresh Joint Venture Tripartite Agreement with the petitioner on 06.12.2006 for the development of the property. The title documents of the property were handed over to the fourth respondent to be kept in escrow. Both agreement dated 08.07.2006 and 06.12.2006 have not been acted upon and the project stood, for all intents and purposes, abandoned.
developmental rights appear to have been assigned by the first and second respondents to the third respondent V.R.Nachimuthu, a partnership firm, without the knowledge of the petitioner. R1 and R2 also place on record agreement dated 24.01.2011 entered into with other owners of adjoining properties for cancellation of the joint development, wherein admittedly the petitioner is not a party. As a logical conclusion, the agreements entered into by the petitioner with
R1 and R2 would survive.
5.To resolve this dispute, notice for arbitration was issued by the petitioner on 10.02.2016 that did not find favour of response from the first respondent. The second respondent however categorically rejected the request for arbitration. The rejection was on the basis that http://www.judis.nic.in
it was unclear under which agreement the reference had been made,
4
the second respondent being a party only under agreement dated 06.12.2006.
facts seeking the appointment of an Arbitrator.
that it is not a necessary party at all in so far as there is no privity of contract between the petitioner and itself. Agreements dated 08.07.2006 and 06.12.2006 have been entered into only between the petitioner and the first and second respondents and as such the very http://www.judis.nic.in arraying of the third respondent is neither proper nor necessary.
5
6
provides for the venue of Arbitration as Coimbatore, I leave open the question of venue to be decided by the Arbitrator subject to his convenience and in consultation with the parties.
13. The petition is ordered in the above terms. No costs.
05.12.2017
msv
7
Dr.Anita Sumanth,J.
msv
O.P. No.111 of 2017
05.12.2017
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can seek appointment of an arbitrator despite unclear agreement references and dispute between parties.
Whether the statutory limitation bars the respondent petitioners in an arbitration appointment petition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M/s.Navaneeth Hotels Private Limited
M/s.Sivasakthi
M/s.P.S.Srijan Projects
M/s.V.R.Nachimuthu
Mr.K.N.V.Ramani
DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
