Hemant Gupta, J. - (1.) THE Petitioner has sought appointment of an Arbitrator by this Court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act')
(2.) THE Petitioner Company obtained a Fire Insurance policy from the Respondents on 15.1.1998 covering the fire risk with interim protection with effect from 16.1.1998 to 15.1.1999. The policy was issued for a total sum of Rs. 458.2 lacs. On the intervening night of 25/26 May, 1998, unfortunately fire broke out in the factory premises of the Petitioner. In the said incident, two open end machines along with stocks and spares were completely damaged. The Petitioner lodged a claim with the Respondents on 28.5.1998 claiming total sum of Rs. 45.46 lacs. The Insurance Company released a sum of Rs. 4,35,246/ - only. Initially, the Petitioner filed a complaint before the National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission, New Delhi on 25.5.1999. The said complaint was returned to the Petitioner with liberty to seek remedy before the Civil Court or any other forum, as may be permitted under law, vide order dated 16.1.2002. The Special Leave Petition was dismissed without issuing any notice on 26.4.2002. It was thereafter on 2.4.2003, the Petitioner filed a petition for appointment of an Arbitrator in terms of Clause 13 of the agreement for referring the dispute to an Arbitrator before the learned District Judge. The said application was returned on 2.4.2004 for presentation before this Court as the subject matter of jurisdiction was more than Rs. 25 lacs as in terms of the Rules, then applicable, such an application was maintainable before this Court only.
(3.) IT is the case of the Petitioner that it has nominated Justice N.C. Kochhar (Retd.) as an Arbitrator in terms of Clause 13 of the agreement. Since the Respondents have not agreed for the Arbitrator nominated by the Petitioner, therefore, the Arbitrator is to be appointed in the manner mentioned in such Clause 13 by this Court.;