Allowed

Mr Abdul Qavi Mahammed Nizamuddin v. Mr Maqdoom Mohiuddin

Telangana HC7 Jan 2020ARBAPPL/25/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an arbitration application filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, appointing a sole arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from a Development agreement cum GPA dated 24-05-2011.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Sri M. Narender Reddy, Senior Advocate, as the sole Arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from the Development agreement cum GPA dated 24-05-2011.

Mr Abdul Qavi Mahammed Nizamuddin Vs Mr Maqdoom Mohiuddin — Arbitration | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶2

ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.25 of 2019

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

By way of this application filed under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short “the Act”), the petitioner seeks appointment of an Arbitrator for resolution of disputes arising under the Development agreement cum GPA dated 24-05-2011 entered into by and between them.

¶5

As disputes arose between them and it is the allegation of the petitioner that respondent has breached the terms of the Development agreement cum GPA dated 24-05-2011 by non-execution of work, the petitioner got issued legal notice dated 18-11-2017 invoking the arbitration clause no.27 under the Development agreement cum GPA to settle the dispute. Clause no.27 of the development agreement cum GPA provides for arbitration for settlement of disputes between the parties by the Arbitrator.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner states that notices issued to respondents 1 & 2, the same returned un-served with a postal endorsement “un-claimed” and notice to respondent no.3 is returned addressee left, is construed to be a deemed service on them.

¶7

Inasmuch as the notice issued by this Court is unclaimed by respondents 1 and 2 and respondent no.3 left the

¶8

¶9

address which is provided in the Development agreement cum GPA, the notice is deemed to be served. The Development agreement cum GPA, provides for arbitration under Clause 27 thereof and the same is not denied or disputed by filing counter by the respondents. Since the claim involved in the subject matter is not of that high value, appointment of sole independent arbitrator would be sufficient.

¶10

Section 10 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

¶11

reads thus: -

¶12

“10. Number of arbitrators.—

¶13

(1) The parties are free to determine the number of arbitrators, provided that such number shall not be an even number.

¶14

(2) Failing the determination referred to in sub- section (1), the arbitral tribunal shall consist of a sole arbitrator.”

¶15

In view of sub-Section (2) of Section 10 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, sole arbitrator can be appointed in the present Arbitration Application. In the circumstances, the arbitration application is liable to be allowed.

¶16

Accordingly, the arbitration application is allowed. Sri M. Narender Reddy, Senior Advocate, is appointed as the sole Arbitrator for resolution of dispute(s) between the petitioner and respondents, arising out of Development agreement cum GPA dated 24-05-2011, 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

¶17

¶18

effect from 23-10-2015, which shall be borne by both parties in equal proportion. No order as to costs.

¶19

_________________________ A.RAJASHEKER REDDY,J

¶20

Dated: 07-01-2020 NRG

¶21

Copy to :: Sri M. Narender Reddy, Sr. Counsel Plot no – 189-C, Rd. No-76, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. (B/o) Nrg

¶22

¶23

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A.RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶24

ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.25 of 2019

¶25

//Web//
Dated: 07-01-2020
NRG

¶26

Mr Abdul Qavi Mahammed Nizamuddin v. Mr Maqdoom Mohiuddin

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Abdul Qavi Mahammed Nizamuddin v. Mr Maqdoom Mohiuddin

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

Raunak Bhandari, Vs M/s.Vintage Avenue Pvt.Ltd.

Triumphant Institute of Management Education Pvt. Ltd, Vs M/s High Fliers Career Academy

M/s. WaterHealth India Pvt. Ltd. Vs IField Energy Private Limited

Addagutta Cooperative Housing Society Vs State of Telangana

Sri B.Damodar Vs State of Telangana

Blue Star Engineering and Electrionics Limtied Vs M/s Continental Hospital Pvt. Ltd.