Allowed

D.Ramanathan Vs

Madras HC22 Feb 2018OP/65/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an original petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to appoint an impartial arbitrator. The court noted that while the third respondent lacked competence, the first respondent subsequently nominated a panel. Drawing from this panel, the judge appointed an arbitrator and directed the first respondent to issue necessary orders within two wee

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Mr. P. Kamban as sole arbitrator; direction to first respondent to appoint within two weeks; completion of proceedings within four months.

D.Ramanathan Vs — Arbitration | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED 22.02.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE ANITA SUMANTH

¶6

O.P. No.65 of 2018

¶7

D.Ramanathan .. Petitioner -vs1.The General Manager, Southern Railway, Park Town, Chennai-600 003. 2.The Principal Chief Engineer, Southern Railway, Park Town, Chennai-600 003.

¶8

3.The Senior DEN/Works/MAS, Southern Railway, Divisional Office, Works Branch, Chennai-600 003. .. Respondents

¶9

Prayer: Petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 to appoint an impartial and independent Arbitrator in terms of Contract Agreement No.52/Works dated 06.05.2013, Clause 13 (C) of the Regulations for Tenders and Contractors and Instructions to Tenderers and Conditions of Tender read with Clause 63 & 64 of Indian Railways Standard General Conditions of Contract and direct the respondents to pay the costs of this petition.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.G.Arul Murugan

¶11

For Respondents : Mr.P.T.Ramkumar

¶12

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶13

2

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

This petition seeks appointment of an impartial and independent Arbitrator in terms of Contract Agreement No.52/Works dated 06.05.2013, Clause 13 (C) of the Regulations for Tenders and Contractors and Instructions to Tenderers and Conditions of Tender read with Clause 63 & 64 of Indian Railways Standard General Conditions of Contract.

¶16

2.Heard Mr.G.Arul Murugan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.T.Ramkumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

¶17

3.The disputes between the parties are admitted.

¶18

4.The petitioner made a request for appointment of Arbitrator on

¶19

22.07.2017 in response to which the first respondent has sought waiver of the condition under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (in short 'the Act').

¶20

Pending decision by R1, and in effect precipitating any such decision, a communication dated 16.08.2017 has been issued by the third respondent rejecting the request for reference of matter to arbitration.

¶21

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶22

3

¶23

6.Mr.P.T.Ramkumar, learned counsel appearing for the

¶24

respondents would fairly state that the rejection by R3 is not in order insofar as the third respondent is not the competent authority to consider and grant the request for reference of matter to Arbitration.

¶25

7.Be that as it may, subsequent to letter dated 16.08.2017, the petitioner has, in fact, executed a waiver under Section 12(5) of the Act and acting upon the same, the first respondent has circulated a

¶26

letter dated 04.01.2018 nominating a panel of arbitrators.

¶27

Drawing from the panel nominated by R1, I appoint

¶28

Mr.P.Kamban, DY.FA&CAO/Budget/MAS as Arbitrator upon consent expressed by the petitioner in this regard.

¶29

R1 is directed to issue necessary orders appointing the aforesaid officer as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon disputes that

¶30

have arisen between the parties out of Contract Agreement No.52/Works dated 06.05.2013 in accordance with the arbitration clause, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy

¶31

of this order. The learned Arbitrator is requested to complete the proceedings within a period of four months therefrom.

¶32

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶33

4

¶34

vga

¶35

Dr.ANITA SUMANTH,J.

¶36

10.This original petition is allowed in the above terms. No costs.

¶37

22.02.2018
vga
Note: Issue order copy on 28.02.2018
O.P. No.65 of 2018

¶38

http://www.judis.nic.in

D.Ramanathan Vs

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Ramanathan Vs

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. Vasavi Housing Vs M/S. Media One Innovation

Dr.Govindaraj Ranganathan Vs M/s.Ozone Projects Pvt.Ltd.

Rti Austria Gmbh Vs M/S.Shriram Epc L

Noise & Grains Entertainment Vs Vasanthakumar

M/s. Rpp Infra Projects Limite Vs M/s. NTPC Tamil Nadu Energy

Mr.K.Kumaran Vs Kgs Developers Ltd.