Allowed

M/s Eagle Speed Service Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Director Mr.Sunil Arya, v. M/s Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd.

Madras HC2 Dec 2020OP/432/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this original petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Madras High Court appointed Mr. M. Sampath as the sole arbitrator to resolve disputes between the parties. The court was satisfied after the parties consented to the suggested name.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Mr. M. Sampath as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

M/s Eagle Speed Service Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Director Mr.Sunil… — Arbitration | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

O.P.No.432 of 2020

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 02.12.2020

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

¶6

Original Petition No.432 of 2020 M/s.Eagle Speed Service Private Limited, Represented by its Director, Mr.Sunil Arya aged 57, 25, Niagara Apartments, Mo.1, Sterling Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 034. ... Petitioner versus M/s.Kone Elevator India Private Limited, Shymala Towers, 5th Floor, East west, 136, Arcot Road, Saligramam, Chennai - 600 093. ... Respondent

¶7

Prayer: Original Petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to appoint a sole arbitrator as per clause 19 of the agreement to resolve the dispute arising out of the agreement dated 23.01.2018.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Aravind Subramaniam For Respondent : M/s. B.Dhanaraj

¶9

1/4

¶10

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶11

O.P.No.432 of 2020

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

The above petition has been filed for appointing a sole Arbitrator in keeping with clause (9) of the agreement dated 23.01.2019, which provided for the resolution of disputes between the petitioner and the respondent by

¶14

reference to an arbitration consisting of a sole Arbitrator.

¶15

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that though the clause gave the authority to the respondent to appoint the Arbitrator they had not done so, thereby constraining the petitioner to move this petition.

¶16

The respondent had entered appearance and would submit that the

¶17

response to the request for appointing an Arbitrator was sent on 14.08.2020

¶18

to which the respondent has sent their reply on 11.11.2020. However, the petitioner has moved the Court in the meanwhile. After hearing the arguments, this Court had suggested the name of Mr.M.Sampath, 42, 3rd Cross Street, Chennai - 94, Cell No.98411 59996 , which was consented by both parties.

¶19

2/4

¶20

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶21

O.P.No.432 of 2020

¶22

4. Accordingly, it is ordered as follows:

¶23

No.98411 59996, is appointed as the Arbitrator to enter upon reference and

¶24

adjudicate the disputes inter se the parties.

¶25

ii) The learned Arbitrator may, after issuing notice to the

¶26

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. It is open to the respondent to raise all legal objections as to the validity of contract.

¶27

iii) The learned Arbitrator is at liberty to fix his remuneration

¶28

and other incidental expenses as per law.

¶29

iv) The proceedings may be conducted under the aegis of the

¶30

Madras High Court Arbitration Centre and in accordance with the Madras High Court Arbitration Rules.

¶31

3/4

¶32

http://www.judis.nic.in

O.P.No.432 of 2020

P.T.ASHA, J.

5. The Original Petition is allowed, leaving the parties to bear

¶37

their own costs.
02.12.2020
Speaking Order / Non-speaking Order
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes
ub
To
Mr.M.Sampath,
42, 3rd Cross Street,
Chennai - 94.
Cell No.98411 59996.
Original Petition No.432 of 2020

¶38

4/4

¶39

http://www.judis.nic.in

M/s Eagle Speed Service Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Director Mr.Sunil Arya, v. M/s Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/s Eagle Speed Service Pvt. Ltd., Rep. by its Director Mr.Sunil Arya, v. M/s Kone Elevator India Pvt. Ltd.

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

R.Jothi Vs M/S.Equitas Small Finance Bank Ltd.

M/s. Everlike Mercantile Private Ltd, Rep by its Authorized Signatory Mr.Ketan Chordia Vs Mrs. Punitha Muthu, Proprietrix of M/s.Kosalrams Foundations

A.Guhan Vs M/S.Deltronix India Ltd.

Vinatha Vs Gayathri (Minor)

M/s. Industrial Fans India Pvt. Ltd, Rep.by its Director Mr.a.UdayKumar, Vs Eddac Engineering Ltd, Rep.by his Managing Director

Mr. S. Loganathan Vs Sundaram Finance Limited