In arbitration applications filed under Section 11(4)-(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the High Court appointed a sole arbitrator due to the respondent's failure to consent within 30 days despite notice. Both parties bear fees equally.
Appointment of Sri E. Jagannadha Reddy as sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes.
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.
[3183 ]
HIGH COURTFOR THESTATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
SATURDAY,THESIXTEENTH DAYOF DECEMBER TWO THOUSANDAND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLESRI JUSTICE B.VIJAYSEN REDDY
ARBITRATIO APPLICA TIONNO: 39 OF 2023
Between:
YerramRamesh,S/oLateYenamYadgiri,-agedabout4Syearq.occ'il;i;;*:'RvtH.i{o. r:-ii14LN202,u5ttri N5sar, Near Nalanda school' Hyderabad,500018
...APPLICANT
AND
NaoillaRuous. S/oLate Sri. N. David aged about54 years'occ busines-s. L. :'ffi #!;. H[ i:i,lo: 8-4-'3erA2 t b] prem Nagar,Enasadda'Near sai Apartment,HYderabad- 5OOO18.
...RESPONDENT
Arbitration Applicationfiled Under Section11(4) & (6) of the Arbitrationand Conciliation Act1990 R/wscheme for Appointment of Arbitrator, 1996 praying that ttti" ff", Of" Courtmay be pleased to (1) appoint sole arbikatorto adiudicateand ;;;;;; th" Jisputepertainingto the Agreement of sate/ArbitrationAgreement dated 11.09.2019(2) to award costs of the Application'
Counsel forthe Applicant :Sri S' NAGESH REDDY
Counsel forthe Respondent:None appeared
The Court madethe following:ORDER
HONOURABLE SRIJUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.39 0F 2023
ORDER:(ORAL)
This application is filed under Section 11(4) & (6) of the Arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'Act 1996') read with the Scheme of Appointment of Arbitrators, 1996, for appointment of an Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes between the appricant and the respondent arising out of the Agreement of Sale dated 1 1.09.2019.
l
UVR.J ARBAI'PL.No.l9-20?l
dispute to anArbitrator by proposingthe narne of Mr' G' Kalyan Chakravarthyas the sole Arbitrator. Notice was servedon the respondent, butdespitelapseof 30 days, the respondent did not prefer to give consentfor appointmentof an Arbitrator'Thus' the petitioner was constrainedto approachthis Court lt is alsostated that {he applicantfiled Arbitration O.P.No.45 of 2022 before the ll Additional Chief Judge,City Civil Court, Hyderabad, under Section 9 of Act 1996' Therespondentinstitutedasuitino.s-No.524of2o22beforethelV Additional JuniorCivil Judge, Ranga Reddy District'for recovery of possession, and thesame is pending'
J
8\ t{.J \Rlt,\t,,,t (,.j9 lot i
in the Fourth Schedule to Act1996, inserted by Act 3 of 2016 with effect from 23.10.2015, which shall be borne by both parties in equal
shares
SD/. C.V.MALLIKARJUNA VARMA JOINT REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
tV/ SECTION.OFFICER
To,
Njb
NS
g
, I t
HIGH COURT
DATED:1611212023
ORDER
ARBAPPL.No.39 ot 2023
g 5T416, o
I
v
a
oo n0Ll r lx,\ ?t2[ o
{'
t
I
DESP Arc
ALLOWING THE ARBITRATION APPLICATION
Gv+
1 issue framed by the court
Whether Court should appoint sole arbitrator in view of respondent's default in consenting to the appointment.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Yerram Ramesh
Nagilla Rupus
B. Vijaysen Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
