Allowed

Va Tech Wabag Limited, Rep.by its Authorised Signatory, Mr.Meenakshi Sundaram v. M/s Sunshine Sheet Piling Projects India

Madras HC17 Aug 2023Arb O.P(COM.DIV.)/258/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court disposed of an arbitration petition filed by VA Tech Wabag Limited against Sunshine Sheets Piling Projects India. Finding a valid arbitration agreement but no party consensus on the arbitrator's name, the Court appointed Mr. S.F. Akbar as the sole arbitrator to decide the commercial dispute.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Mr. S.F. Akbar, District Judge (Retd.), as sole arbitrator.

Va Tech Wabag Limited, Rep.by its Authorised Signatory… — Arbitration | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Arb. O.P. (Com. Div.) No.258 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 17.08.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

¶6

Arb. O.P. (Com. Div.) No.258 of 2023

¶7

VA Tech Wabag Limited, Rep. by its Authorised Signatory, Meenkshi Sundaram ... Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

Sunshine Sheets Piling Projects India, No.51/E, Agarwala Garden Road, Nandana Kolkata - 700 034, West Bengal ... Respondent

¶10

Prayer : Arbitration Original Petition (Commercial Division) filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to appoint a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent in terms of the Arbitration Agreement in clause 20 of the Annexure to the Purchase Order dated 27.11.2019 and to direct the respondent to pay the costs to the petitioner.

¶11

For petitioner : Mr.C.P. Prasanth Gopal For respondent : No appearance

¶12

ORDER

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

1/6

¶15

Arb. O.P. (Com. Div.) No.258 of 2023

¶16

This petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration

¶17

and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking for appointment of an Arbitrator by

¶18

this Court.

¶19

The petitioner had placed a Work Order with the respondent on 27.11.2019 requesting the respondent to supply certain materials. The petitioner claims that an advance amount was also paid in terms of the Work Order. The Work Order was also amended on 17.02.2020. However, the respondent despite the receipt of the advance amount has failed to supply the materials to the petitioner in terms of the Work Order. As per the dispute resolution clause available in the terms and conditions of the sale, the petitioner has also referred the dispute to mediation by its letter dated 03.11.2022. Despite the efforts made by the petitioner for mediation no fruitful purpose was served. Therefore in accordance with the arbitration clause contained in the terms and conditions of the sale, the petitioner had invoked the arbitration by issuing a notice to the respondent on 05.12.2022, which is extracted hereunder :

¶20

20. Arbitration & Jurisdiction

¶21

2/6

¶22

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

Arb. O.P. (Com. Div.) No.258 of 2023

¶24

"Unless otherwise specified in all cases of dispute which cannot be settled by mutual negotiations the matter shall be referred to the Managing Directors of both Parties for mediation. If the dispute persists for a period of 14 days from the day of reference to mediation, the matter shall be referred for arbitration in accordance with Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or any statutory modification or reenactment thereof being in force at that time. Order shall be executed by the Supplier / Contractor during arbitration proceedings unless otherwise directed in writing by the purchaser. All such arbitration proceedings shall be conducted in English language and will be held at Chennai only. All disputes shall be subject to the sole jurisdiction of Chennai courts only. This order shall be governed by the laws of India"

¶25

The arbitration invocation notice dated 05.12.2022 was also

¶26

received by the respondent as seen from the tracking report issued by the postal department website. Since there has been no consensus with regard to the name of the arbitrator, this petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking for appointment of an Arbitrator. The notice in this application has been duly served on the respondent and the name of the respondent is also printed in the cause list today.

¶27

Since there is a valid arbitration agreement entered into between

¶28

the petitioner and the respondent arising out of the Work Order, dated

¶29

27.11.2019 and the amended Work Order dated 17.02.2020 and the 3/6

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

Arb. O.P. (Com. Div.) No.258 of 2023

¶32

petitioner has also invoked the arbitration clause by sending the arbitration invocation notice dated 05.12.2022 as per the provisions of Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 which has been duly acknowledged by the respondent and there being no consensus with regard to the name of the arbitrator between the parties, this Court will have to necessarily appoint an arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties arising out of the Work Order, dated 27.11.2019 as well as the amended Work Order, dated 17.02.2020.

¶33

For the foregoing reasons, this Court appoints Mr.S.F. Akbar, District Judge (Retd.) as a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the petitioner and the respondent arising out of the Work Order dated 27.11.2019 and the amended Work Order dated 17.02.2020. Accordingly, this Arbitration Original Petition is allowed as prayed for by issuing the following directions:

¶34

a) This Court appoints Mr.S.F. Akbar, District Judge (Retd.), having office at Plot No.4, Fathima Villa, Pillaiyar Koil, 4th Cross Street, Perungudi, Chennai - 600 096 (Mobile

¶35

No.9840094439) as a sole Arbitrator to decide the dispute

¶36

between the petitioner and the respondent arising out of the

¶37

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶38

4/6

¶39

Arb. O.P. (Com. Div.) No.258 of 2023

¶40

Work Order dated 27.11.2019 and the amended Work Order dated 17.02.2020.

¶41

(b) The Arbitrator shall be paid his remuneration / fees in

¶42

accordance with the 4 th schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

¶43

¶44

the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, while passing the arbitral award, The Arbitrator shall conduct the arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and shall complete the arbitration

¶45

within the specified time as prescribed under the said Act.

fees.

17.08.2023

vsi2

ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.

¶51

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶52

5/6

¶53

Arb. O.P. (Com. Div.) No.258 of 2023

¶54

vsi2

¶55

Arb. O.P. (Com. Div.) No.258 of 2023

¶56

17.08.2023

¶57

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶58

6/6

Va Tech Wabag Limited, Rep.by its Authorised Signatory, Mr.Meenakshi Sundaram v. M/s Sunshine Sheet Piling Projects India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Va Tech Wabag Limited, Rep.by its Authorised Signatory, Mr.Meenakshi Sundaram v. M/s Sunshine Sheet Piling Projects India

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

B.Sridharan Vs v.M.Pazhani

M/s Anand Granites Exports Private Limited, Vs Mr.Prabhudayal Agrawal

K.Kandasamy Vs R.Sulochana

M/s Sharvika Properties, Rep.by its Managing partner B.Gopi, Vs K.N.Sampath

Mr.J.v.Venkata Rao Vs Dr.Suresh Chandra Nayak

M/s.New Link Overseas Finance Ltd., Rep.by its Director, Vs M/s Sargam Metals Pvt. Ltd., Rep.by its Director