By the impugned judgment, the companyrt while allowing the petition, has directed Divisional Commercial Manager of Railways to appoint a person as Arbitrator within thirty days from the date of order and has further directed that the Arbitrator so appointed shall visit the site in presence of both the parties and shall physically verify if there was occupation of any part of the parking site by old and unclaimed vehicles, at the time of auction of the parking site.
It is further submitted, that, the companyrt while exercising its powers under Section 11 6 of the Act, ought number to have directed the respondent to appoint a fresh Arbitrator, when the respondent had failed and neglected to appoint an Arbitrator, despite the fact that the appellant had invoked the arbitration clause in the agreement and instead should have appointed a qualified Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
339 of 2007 dated 28th day of February, 2008.
The appellant calls in question the companyrectness or otherwise of the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi in Arbitration Case No.
However, at the time of hearing of the appeal, the learned companynsel for the appellant submits, that instead of deciding all the legal issues raised in the appeal, this companyrt may appoint one Shri D.R. Bhatia, former Joint Registrar of Delhi High Court as the sole Arbitrator and direct the Arbitrator to resolve all the disputes between the parties as envisaged under the agreement.
Leave granted.
AA No.
