9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 1281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the failure of the respondent to hand over vacant possession in terms of the lease deed despite a letter dated 6-11-1996, the arbitration clause was invoked by the appellant. The arbitrator entered upon reference and published his Award on 28-4-1997 which was subsequently corrected for clerical error vide order dated 29-7-1997. The arbitration clause envisaged the appointment of the Arbitrator with notice to the other party and the other party was required to nominate their own arbitrator within 15 days of the service of such notice. The two Arbitrators were required to appoint an Umpire and the place of the arbitration was Delhi. The arbitration clause further provided a consequence of the failure of the other party in appointing his ar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 5. The issue which arose before the learned single Judge was the effect of such unilateral reference to the arbitrator or the effect of non-appointment of the Arbitrator by the other party. The contention before the learned Single Judge by the respondent was that section 11 of the Act prescribe the procedure for appointment of Arbitrator and in view of section 11(6)( c ), the appellant should have approach the Chief Justice or any person or institution designated by him to take the necessary measure for appointment of the Arbitrator on behalf of the respondent. On the other hand the appellant submitted before the learned Single Judge the reading of section 11(6)( c ) would show that this was so required to be done unless the agreement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the first party to act as a Sole Arbitrator in case of the failure of the other party to appoint their Arbitrator. The Bombay High Court thus held that in view of section 11(6) providing for the procedure in case of an agreement on appointment other than the mode of approaching the Chief Justice, the sole arbitrator rightly conducted the proceedings. We are in agreement with this interpretation of section 11 and the judgment applies on all fours in the present case. The question of the appellant approaching the Chief Justice through the proceedings in the Court would have arisen only if this agreement was not contained in the arbitration clause i.e., the agreement that in case of failure of the other party to appoint arbitrator, the first ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... learned Single Judge that the Award made is a nullity or totally without jurisdiction in view of the sole arbitrator proceeding with the matter. As stated above, the question of invocation of the jurisdiction of the Chief Justice to appoint an arbitrator in terms of section 11 would have arisen only in the absence of an agreement providing the alternate procedure on the non-appointment of the Arbitrator by one party. In the present case, there was an agreement that the arbitrator appointed by one party would proceed as sole Arbitrator on the failure of the other party to appoint an Arbitrator. This coupled with the failure of the respondent to file any objection within limitation under section 34(2)( v ) leaves no doubt in our mind that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
