Vantage Advertising Private Limited vs The Commissioner

S. Abdul Nazeer, J.—The petitioner has filed this civil miscellaneous petition u/s 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (for short ''the Act'') for appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute which has arisen out of the Agreements at Annexures-A and B, both dated 31.03.2004 and Annexures-C and D dated 12.10.2007 & 25.07.2007 respectively

The petitioner is a private limited company, registered under the Companies Act, 1956, engaged in the business of outdoor advertising. It has entered into agreements with the respondent at Annexures-A & B both dated 31.3.2004, whereby, the respondent had granted permission to the petitioner to maintain certain roads in Mysore city. The respondent has also granted permission to erect certain advertisement boxes on either side of the road. It was also permitted to erect and maintain tubular poles and street lights of certain roads in Mysore. Further, two fresh agreements at Annexures-C and D have entered into between the parties for the similar purpose.

It is the case of the petitioner that respondent has failed to perform its obligation under the aforesaid agreements. The respondent has illegally terminated the contract. Therefore, the petitioner filed writ petition in W.P. No. 32218/2010 challenging the termination of the contract and the demand notice issued by the respondent calling upon the petitioner to pay advertisement tax and ground rent. This Court by order dated 5.4.2011 quashed the termination notice. This Court observed that the issue regarding non-performance of the petitioner under the agreement is a matter to be considered in terms of the arbitration clause contained in the agreements. Thereafter petitioner issued a notice at Annexure-L dated 30.1.2014 calling upon the respondent to appoint an arbitrator for the resolution of the dispute.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner in her submissions has reiterated the contentions urged in the petition. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondent contends that the respondent has not violated any of the terms of the contract. She has no objection for appointment of an arbitrator for the resolution of the dispute.

It is clear that the aforesaid agreements contain an arbitration clause for the resolution of the disputes. It is also clear that the disputes have arisen in relation to the aforesaid agreements between the parties. Therefore, it is just and proper to appoint an arbitrator to resolve the disputes between the parties.

In the result, civil miscellaneous petition is allowed-in-part. Hon''ble Sri. Justice Mohammad Anwar, is requested to enter upon the reference and arbitrate over the dispute and conduct arbitration proceedings at Arbitration Center in terms of the Arbitration Center-Karnataka (Domestic and International) Rules, 2012.

Registry is directed to send a copy of this order to the Arbitration Centre, Bangalore, forthwith.