High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 04 CAL CK 0031

PEERLESS FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED vs MRS. MEERA PRADIP KOTHARI

Calcutta High Court · Decided on 30 April 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
ASHIS KUMAR CHAKRABORTY, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
AP 105 of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

16 paragraphs · 339 words

The Court:-This is an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of a fit and proper person as the

arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties relating to the agreement dated December 24, 2014.

From the affidavit of service filed on behalf of the petitioner, it appears that a copy of this application forwarded to the respondent has been certified

by the postal authority to have been served upon the respondent. Let the said affidavit of service be kept on record.

The arbitration agreement between the parties contemplates that the disputes and differences, if any, between the parties shall be resolved by a sole

arbitrator or in case of disagreement as to the appointment of the sole arbitrator, to three arbitrators, out of which the petitioner shall appoint one

arbitrator and the respondent shall appoint the second arbitrator and the third arbitrator shall be appointed by the two arbitrators.

As per clause 21.1 of the said agreement dated December 24, 2014, any notice or request or demand or other communication by one party to the

other would be in writing and delivered by hand or courier or e-mail or fax or by registered post with acknowledgement. It appears that by an

electronic mail dated November 29, 2017, the petitioner informed the respondent of the factum of the disputes between the parties, as well as the

appointment of a sole arbitrator for adjudication of such disputes. The respondent appears to have received the said electronic mail, but she has not

raised any objection to the appointment of the sole arbitrator named by the petitioner.

Since the respondent has not raised any objection to the appointment of the arbitrator named by the petitioner, the disputes between the parties are to

be adjudicated upon by the said arbitrator and there is no scope for passing any other direction in the matter.

With the above directions, the application, being AP No. 105 of 2018 stands disposed of.

There shall, however, be no order as to costs.