Allowed

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

Telangana HC6 Jan 2020ARBAPPL/34/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court appointed a sole retired Senior Civil Judge as the arbitrator for a dispute arising from a Marketing and Reselling Agreement regarding agricultural land. The respondent did not appear or file any response.

What did the court decide?

Appointment of Sri Narsimha Chary, Retired Senior Civil Judge, as the sole arbitrator for resolution of the dispute. Fees to be borne equally by both parties. No order as to costs.

Raunak Bhandari, Vs M/s.Vintage Avenue Pvt.Ltd. — Arbitration | Telangana HC (2020)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.34 of 2019 ORDER :

¶2

This Arbitration Application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for brevity “the Act”) is filed by the applicant seeking appointment of an Arbitrator for resolution of the disputes between the applicant and the respondent arose out of the Registered Marketing and Reselling Agreement vide document No.2939/2008, dated 01-11-2007.

¶3

The case of the applicant is that the respondent entered into Marketing and Reselling Agreement with him in respect of agricultural land admeasuring Ac.12-19 guntas covered by Sy.Nos 1248/AA, 1248/E and 1253/AA situated at Nandigoan Village, Kottur Mandal, Mahaboobnagar District. During the course of execution of said agreement, the applicant fulfilled the obligations under the agreement, but the respondent failed to fulfill the obligations. As such, disputes arose regarding payment of amounts. On that the petitioner issued legal notice dated 16-102018. Though the same was served, there is no response from the respondent. Hence this application is filed.

¶4

Though notice is served, no counter affidavit is filed and there is no appearance for respondent.

¶5

It is to be seen that Clause No.19 of the Registered Marketing and Reselling Agreement vide document No.2939/2008, dated 0111-2007 provides for arbitration, which reads as under:

¶6

“In case of any difference of opinion about this Agreement, the same shall be referred to a single arbitrator, mutually acceptable to both parties whose decision shall be final and binding on both the parties.”

¶7

¶8

In pursuance of the said Arbitration Clause, the applicant has already issued a Legal Notice on 16-10-2018. But there was no response from the respondent. As such, in view of assertions made by the applicant and in view of facts and circumstances stated above, this application needs to be allowed.

¶9

Accordingly, this Arbitration Application is allowed appointing Sri Narsimha Chary, Retired Senior Civil Judge, as the sole Arbitrator for resolution of dispute(s) between the applicant and respondent, arising out of Registered Marketing and Reselling Agreement vide document No.2939/2008, dated 01-11-2007 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.

¶10

As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.

¶11

____________________________ A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J

¶12

06-01-2020

¶13

Note: Mark a copy to Sri Narasimha Chary, H.No.2-2-18/18/3/3, Flat No.101, Raja Gruha Apartments, C-32/8, Durgabai Deshmukh Colony, Hyderabad-500013. Cell No.8074924976. B/o. Nvl

¶14

¶15

¶16

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY

¶17

ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.84 of 2019

¶18

02-01-2020 Nvl

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raunak Bhandari, v. M/s.Vintage Avenue 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

Jangili Raghuram Vs M.Lingaiah

S.Sudarshan Reddy (Died per LRs Petitioner Nos.2 to 5)) Vs M/s.Pride India Mansions Pvt.Ltd.

Varaganti Srinivasa Rao Vs Sri Emmadi Vishnu Vardhan Reddy

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

M/S Salient Projects Private Limited, Hyd Vs M/S R.K. Electric Automation Limited, Hyd