AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
It is borne out from the record that service is sufficient, however no one appears on behalf of the Respondent.
It is well settled that, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19961, the scope of enquiry is confined to examining the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement2.
In the present case, there is no dispute with regard to the existence of a valid arbitration clause between the parties. Therefore, this Court finds no impediment in appointing a Sole Arbitrator.
Accordingly, Mr. Vidhan Malik, Advocate (Mob. No.9971178860) is appointed as a learned Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes arisen between the parties. The learned Sole Arbitrator shall enter upon the reference within three weeks from today.
The learned Sole Arbitrator will proceed to the arbitration proceedings subject to furnishing requisite disclosures as required under Section 12(2) of the Act within three weeks of entering reference.
The arbitration shall be carried under the rules and aegis of Delhi International Arbitration Centre (“DIAC”). The learned Arbitrator shall be entitled to fees as per the Schedule of Fees maintained by the DIAC.
It shall be open to the parties to raise all pleas, including objection as to arbitrability and jurisdiction, before the learned Sole Arbitrator who shall decide the same in accordance with law.
It is clarified that the observations made herein are only for the purpose of deciding the present petition under Section 11(6) of the Act. The learned Sole Arbitrator shall adjudicate the disputes independently and on their own merits, uninfluenced by any observations contained in the present order.
The Registry is directed to send a receipt of this order to Mr. Vidhan Malik, learned Arbitrator through all permissible modes including email.
Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of in the above terms.