Allowed

Sycone Cpmc Private Limited v. Indian Institute of Management

Rajasthan HC25 Nov 2021ARBAP/19/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This arbitration application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was filed for appointing an arbitrator to resolve a dispute between the applicant and respondent. The court, finding no dispute regarding the arbitration agreement, accepted the application and appointed a retired Chief Justice as the sole arbitrator.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Govind Mathur (Retired Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court) as sole arbitrator.

Sycone Cpmc Private Limited Vs Indian Institute of Management — Arbitration | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

(1 of 3)

¶2

[ARBAP-19/2020]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶4

S.B. Arbitration Application No. 19/2020

¶5

Sycone CPMC Private Limited, Through Its Managing Director , Mr. Yashavanth Anantharaj, S/o Anantharaj Nagaraja Shastry, Aged About 55 Years, the Applicant Having Its Registered Address At #219/11, 3Rd Floor, Bellary Road Sadashivanagar, Bengaluru - 560080

¶6

----Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Indian Institute Of Management, Udaipur Through Its Director, Mr. Janat Shah, Aged About 62 Year, The Respondent Having Its Registered Address At Balicha Village, Udaipur - 313001

¶9

----Respondent

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Mohit Singhvi For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sheetal Kumbhat.

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINIT KUMAR MATHUR

¶12

Order

¶13

25/11/2021

¶14

The present application has been filed by the applicant under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of the Arbitrator to resolve the dispute which has arisen between the applicant Sycone CPMC Private Limited and the Indian Institute of Management, Udaipur.

¶15

The notices were issued by this Court and the same are served on the non-applicant/respondent.

¶16

Heard the counsel and perused the material available on record.

¶17

No reply has been filed.

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[ARBAP-19/2020]

¶20

The parties entered into a contract agreement on 09/04/2013 and as per the contract agreement, there is an arbitration clause enumerated in para 1.3.1.3, which reads as under :-

¶21

1.3.1.3. In the event, the parties fail to resolve the dispute through the settlement proceedings under clause 1.3.1.2, the parties will be at liberty to refer all such disputes or difference for adjudication through arbitration by a sole arbitrator appointed by the Institute. If the appointed sole arbitrator resigns his appointment or vacates his office due to any reason whatsoever, another sole arbitrator shall be appointed in the manner aforesaid and he shall proceed with the reference from the stage at which it was left by his predecessor. The party invoking arbitration shall give a list of disputes including the details of the amounts claimed-if any in respect of each such dispute. It is also a term of this Contract that if the PMC does not make any demand for appointment of arbitrator in respect of any claims in writing as aforesaid within fifteen (15) days of the cause of action, the claim of the PMC shall be deemed to have been waived and absolutely barred and The Institute shall be discharged and released of all liabilities under the Contract in respect of these claims.

¶22

Learned counsel for the parties does not dispute the fact of an arbitration clause and the dispute which has arisen between the parties.

¶23

According to the provisions contained in Section 11 (6A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, while considering any application under sub-section (4), (5) & (6), the Court is only required to examine the existence of an arbitration agreement. As the existence of arbitration agreement is not in dispute, the application filed by the applicant deserves to be accepted.

¶24

In the circumstances, the arbitration application is allowed. Hon’ble Mr. Justice Govind Mathur (Retired Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court) is appointed as a sole Arbitrator to

¶25

(3 of 3) [ARBAP-19/2020]

¶26

adjudicate upon the dispute between the parties in terms of arbitration agreement and as per the Rajasthan Manual of Procedure for Alternative Dispute Resolution, 2009, as amended up to date and also as per the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

¶27

The record of the case may be transmitted to the Hon’ble Mr. Justice Govind Mathur (Retd).

¶28

The above appointment is subject to the necessary disclosure under Section 12 of the Act.

¶29

Needles to say that the fee of the Arbitrator will be as per the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.

¶30

(VINIT KUMAR MATHUR),J

¶31

89-SanjayS/-

Sycone Cpmc Private Limited v. Indian Institute of Management

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sycone Cpmc Private Limited v. Indian Institute of Management

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

Sonu @ Shohan Vs State of Rajasthan

Anil Vs State

Ricchpal Vs State of Rajasthan

Mahendra Singh Vs State of Rajasthan

Bal Kishan Vs Meera Devi

Teja Ram Vs Jhamku Devi