- (1.) The arbitration application has been filed, seeking appointment of the arbitrator under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act').
(2.) After hearing the learned counsels for the parties, and perusing the application of the applicant as well as the reply filed by the respondents, it appears that the respondents have not disputed the arbitration clause 37 of the agreement, which reads as under :- 37. (a) All questions, disputes and differences arising under or in relation to this Agreement shall be referred to the sole arbitration of the Director (Marketing) of the Corporation. If such Director (Marketing) is unable or unwilling to act as the sole arbitrator, the matter shall be referred to the sole arbitrator or some other officer of the Corporation by such Director (Marketing) in his place, who is willing to act as such sole arbitrator. It is known to the parties herein that the Arbitrator appointed hereunder is an employee of the Corporation and may be Shareholder of the Corporation. The arbitrator to whom the matter is originally referred, whether the Director (Marketing) or Officer, as the case may be, on his being transferred or vacating his office or being unable to act, for any reason, the Director (Marketing) shall designate any other person to act as an arbitrator in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and such person shall be entitled to proceed with the reference form the stage at which it was let by his predecessor. It is also the term of this Agreement that no person other than the Director (Marketing) or the person designated by the Director (Marketing) as aforesaid shall act as arbitrator. The award of the Arbitrator so appointed shall be final, conclusive and binding on all the parties to the Agreement and provisions of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 or any statutory modification or re-enactment thereof and the Rules made thereunder and for the time being in force shall apply to the arbitration proceedings under this clause".
(3.) The respondents have also not disputed the receipt of the notice dated 14/8/2013, addressed to all the respondents calling upon them to settle the dispute under the agreement and/or appoint the arbitrator. The only contention raised by the learned counsel Mr. Samit Bishnoi for the respondents is that the applicant was required to refer the dispute to the named arbitrator i.e. the Director (Marketing) of the Corporation, as contemplated in the said Clause 37. The learned counsel has relied upon the decision of Apex Court in case of Indian Oil Corporation Limited & Ors. vs. Raja Transport Private Limited, 2009 8 SCC 520 to buttress his submission to the effect that if the applicant wanted to invoke the arbitration in terms of the arbitration agreement, it ought to have been referred the disputes to the Director (Marketing), and there was no need to give any notice as such.;