KAY IRON WORKS PVT LTD Vs. EVEREST CEMENT CO LTD
LAWS(CHH)-2005-5-12
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH
Decided on May 09,2005

Kay Iron Works Pvt Ltd Appellant
VERSUS
Everest Cement Co Ltd Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) HEARD on admission as well as on the application (M.C.P. No. 587/ 2005) for stay.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that the agreement dated 25th July, 1998 between the parties contained arbitration clause whereunder in case of a dispute, the parties could refer it for arbitration of a single arbitrator. However, in the event both the parties not agreeing for the appointment of single arbitrator, each party was to nominate one arbitrator of his choice. The dispute was then to be referred to such arbitrators under the Arbitration Act, 1940. In pursuance of the above arbitration clause, the defendant/appellant appointed Mr. Vijay Bhatia to act as its arbitrator and the plaintiff/respondent appointed Mr. Ravishankar Jha to act as its arbitrator. However, despite several notices issued by Mr. Vijay Bhatia the arbitrator for the defendant/appellant, Mr. Ravishankar Jha the arbitrator for the plaintiff/respondent completely neglected to participate in the proceedings. Thereafter, the defendant/appellant issued a notice dated 09-02-2004 to the plaintiff/respondent to appoint any other arbitrator within 15 days, failing which his arbitrator Mr. Vijay Bhatia would proceed to act as sole arbitrator in the above proceeding. Despite issuance of such notice, the plaintiff/respondent did not appoint a fresh arbitrator whereupon Mr. Vijay Bhatia acting as the sole arbitrator entered upon the reference and passed an award of Rs. 71.372 lakhs in favour of the defendant/appellant and against the plaintiff/respondent.
(3.) THE plaintiff/respondent preferred an objection under Section 30 of the Arbitration Act alleging inter alia that the sole arbitrator had not considered the claim of the plaintiff/respondent.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.