Allowed

M/s.Bharat Petroleum v. Mr.Ganesh, Proprietor

Madras HC4 Dec 2017OP/804/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited for appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate disputes arising from a dispensing pump and selling license agreement where liability was admitted by the respondent.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Mr. J. Sivanandaraj as Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate disputes between parties.

M/s.Bharat Petroleum Vs Mr.Ganesh, Proprietor — Arbitration | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED 04.12.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶6

O.P. No.804 of 2017

¶7

M/s.Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited rep. by its Territory Manager Mr.K.Narayanan .. Petitioner -vsMr.Ganesh, Proprietor, Sri Ganeshaa Fuels, Amaragudhi, Omalur Taluk, Salem District. .. Respondent

¶8

Prayer: Petition filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 to appoint a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute arose between the parties herein pursuant to the dispensing pump and selling license agreement dated 01.10.2013.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Vijayan

¶10

For Respondent : No appearance

¶11

This petition seeks appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to resolve

¶12

the disputes between the petitioner and respondents in terms of Article 18(a) of the Dispensing Pump and Selling Licence dated 01.10.2013.

¶13

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶14

¶15

Liability of an amount of Rs.7,21,400/- has been admitted by the respondent, who had undertaken to settle the outstanding on or before 08.02.2017 vide letter dated 03.02.2017. However, there has been no compliance and the amount still remains outstanding.

¶16

The petitioner has issued communication of even date to the respondent seeking immediate compliance of the commitment of repayment, failing which the petitioner has indicated appropriate action as the policy agreed upon, without any response. Notice issued in this petition has been duly received by the respondent and an affidavit of service filed to this effect. However, there is no representation for the respondent, despite his name being printed in the cause list.

¶17

In the light of the admission of liability by the respondent and the clause for arbitration in the agreement being clause 18, I am inclined to order this petition.

¶18

I thus, appoint Mr.J.Sivanandaraj, Advocate residing at 16,

¶19

Kustian Beach Road, Mylapore, Chennai - 04 (Mobile No.9841024778), as the Sole Arbitrator to enter upon reference and

¶20

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶21

¶22

adjudicate the disputes inter se the parties. He may, after issuing notice to the parties and upon hearing them, pass an award as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the order. The Arbitrator is at liberty to fix his remuneration and other incidental expenses. The proceedings may

¶23

be conducted under the aegis of the Madras High Court Arbitration
Centre and in accordance with the Madras High Court Arbitration
Rules.
6.The Original Petition is, accordingly, allowed. No costs.
04.12.2017
sl

¶24

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶25

¶26

Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J.

O.P. No.804 of 2017

04.12.2017

http://www.judis.nic.in

M/s.Bharat Petroleum v. Mr.Ganesh, Proprietor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s.Bharat Petroleum v. Mr.Ganesh, Proprietor

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.Hardy Exploration & Vs Oil and NAtural Gas Corporatio

Muthu Mase Matriculation Vs M/s.Educomp Solutions Ltd.

Essel vision productions Ltd. Vs Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited

Raghav Saraf Vs M/s.Elysium Constructions

D.Samuel Surendran Vs P.Badrinath

A.Duraisamy Vs Vp Petro6 Engineers and