AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
J.D. Kapoor, J.—This a petition under Sections 12,13,& 14(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act seeking appointment of another arbitrator as the petitioner has doubt about the integrity of the arbitrator who according to him biased against the petitioner from the day one in-as-much as that his counter claim filed on 18.9.99 though was allowed for consideration but inspire of allowing the consideration of the counter claim the order was passed that the same would be entertained only if the reference is made as per arbitration agreement. inspire of insistence of the petitioner that the arbitrator should make the position clear as to his counter claim, the arbitrator remained silent.
However, the petitioner further contends that the arbitrator was to give the award within six months as per clause 24 of the Agreement and this period was extendable only with the consent of both the parties and since no such period has been extended, the Agreement ceases to exist. However, without going into the controversy as to the conduct of the arbitrator and the apprehension of the petitioner as to the impartiality of the arbitrator and without making any observation in this regard the request of the petitioner for appointment of a retired High Court Judge as an arbitrator is allowed in order to avoid further controversy that may arise during the proceeding before the present arbitrator.
Mrs. Santosh Dugga, Hon''ble Judge of Delhi High Court (Retired) is appointed as an arbitrator. She will fix her own fees.
The petitioner has agreed that he will not insist for the within which the arbitrator shall give the award.
The petition is allowed. is also stands disposed of.