The court allowed an application solely to appoint a fresh sole arbitrator since the previously appointed arbitrator recused himself due to a personal conflict of interest with the applicant's counsel, under a valid 1992 development agreement.
Appointment of Sri A.Nava Mohan Rao, Retired District Judge, as the sole Arbitrator.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.1 of 2014
ORDER:
The case of the applicant is that Smt. B. Kamala Devi and B. Manjula Devi are absolute owners of the property No.4-1-357/1 & 2, admeasuring 600 square yards situated at Hanuman Tekdi, Hyderabad. Subsequently, late Smt. B. Kamala Devi and Smt. B. Manjula Devi have obtained building permission from MCH for construction of Cellar, Ground and Three Floors dated 23.03.1991 and thereafter, they entered into a development agreement dated 29.01.1992 with the 1st respondent. The applicant has become absolute owner of the entire property by virtue of the will executed by late Smt. B. Kamala Devi, his mother, bequeathing her interest in his favour and also due to relinquishment of share of Smt. B. Manjula Devi, his sister, in his favour. As the 1st respondent has violated the terms of agreement and constructed the building with deviations and was trying to induct the third parties into possession, the parties have invoked arbitration clause No.15 to resolve the disputes and approached Mr. K. Venkata Swamy, arbitrator, who did not evince any interest and not taken any steps and the parties sought for removal of the arbitrator and appointment of fresh arbitrator. Later, OP.No.18 of 1998 was filed before the IV Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, for appointment of an arbitrator and learned Senior Civil Judge by order dated 13.04.2006 has appointed Sri K.K. Waghray as an arbitrator to resolve the disputes. Sri K.K. Waghray by letter dated 28.09.2006 has intimated that since he was teacher to the father of the applicant’s counsel he cannot accept the appointment and
2
ARR,J AA.No.1 of 2014
requested to seek for fresh appointment of arbitrator. On 09.09.2011, the applicant issued legal notice to the respondent to complete the work as per the agreement dated 29.01.1992 and the respondent not replied to the legal notice. Hence, the present application is filed by the applicant for appointment of fresh arbitrator in order to resolve the disputes between the parties.
“In case of any dispute as regards the said agreement the same would be referred to Sri K.Venkatswamy who shall be the sole arbitrator and his decisions would be binding on the parties.”
3
ARR,J AA.No.1 of 2014
and respondents, arising out of agreement dated 29-01-1992, in accordance with the provisions and mandate of the Act of 1996. The learned Arbitrator shall be entitled to fees as per the rates specified in the Fourth Schedule to the Act of 1996, inserted by Act 3 of 2016 with effect from 23-10-2015, which shall be borne by both parties in equal measure. No order as to costs.
__________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY, J
Date: 12-11-2019
Note:
Mark a copy to Sri A.Nava Mohan Rao, Retired District Judge, H.No.5-4-666, 2nd Floor, Peshawar Plaza, Kattlemandi, Abids, Hyderabad. (b/o) ska
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to appoint a new sole arbitrator when the previously appointed arbitrator declares inability to continue accepting the appointment.
Whether the arbitration clause in the agreement dated 29-01-1992 is valid for appointment of arbitrator under the Arbitration Act 1996.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Applicant
Respondents
A RAJASHEKER REDDY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
