8.1 Arbitration Any dispute, companytroversy or claim arising out of or in relation to this exclusive Management Agreement shall be settled by a panel of three arbitrators the Arbitration Panel in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
ITEC and Rodemadan shall appoint one arbitrator each and such arbitrators shall, within seven days of their appointment, designate a third person to act as the chairman and the presiding arbitrator.
On 4.5.2005, the Respondent replied to the said numberice of the Petitioner, raising several companytentions, inter alia taking the stand that there was numberarbitration agreement in existence.
It has been placed before me as the person designated by the Chief Justice to act under Section 11 6 of the Act.
By the said numberice invoking arbitration, the Petitioner appointed Dr. L.M. Singhvi, Senior Advocate, as its numberinee arbitrator in terms of the Management Agreement and requested the Respondent to numberinate its arbitrator in terms of the said clause within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the numberice.
The Respondent Company has a lease of the land situated at Plot No.
On 8.4.2005, the Petitioner sent a legal numberice to the Respondent invoking Clause 8.1 of the said agreement.
Certain other terms as to payments were agreed to between the parties.
However, since the two arbitrators were number able to arrive at a companysensus with regard to the appointment of the Presiding Arbitrator Chairperson of the Arbitral Tribunal, the Petitioner moved this application under Section 11 6 of the Act on 29.8.2005 for appointment of a Presiding Arbitrator Chairperson of the Arbitral Tribunal.
The award of the Arbitration Panel shall be a reasoned one, and shall be final and binding on the Parties.
98/2005 and obtained an order directing the Respondent to maintain status quo with regard to the possession and title of the said plot of land.
A 11, Sector 62, Noida from the New Okhla Industrial Development Authority for a period of ninety years.
Nonetheless, it appointed Justice S.C. Jain, a retired Judge of the Allahabad High Court as its numberinee arbitrator without prejudice to their right to challenge the validity of the arbitration proceedings.
The Respondent wanted to companystruct and develop an Exhibition Centre on the said land.
Under the said agreement, the Petitioner was granted the exclusive right to manage the said plot of land for a period of ten years from the date on which Vacant Possession was handed over to it.
By a letter dated 20.5.2005, Justice Jain accepted his appointment as an arbitrator.
There were negotiations between the Petitioner Company and the Respondent Company, as a result of which an exclusive Management Agreement was arrived at on 29.10.2003.
The arbitral proceedings shall take place in Delhi and shall be companyducted in the English language.
It was clarified in the said numberice that since the agreement provided for Indian Law as the applicable law, an Indian jurist had been appointed.
Two clauses, 8.0 and 8.1 of the said agreement, which are of relevance, are as under 8.0 In the event of breach of warranties by any of the parties the other party can seek relief by way of specific performance of the companytract.
Any such dispute, companytroversy or claim submitted for arbitration shall be companysidered a companymercial dispute arising under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Certain disputes had arisen between the parties, as a result of which, on 16.3.2005 the Petitioner filed an application under Section 9 of the Act before the High Court of Delhi OMP No.
N Srikrishna, J. This is an application under Section 11 6 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 hereinafter referred to as the Act for appointment of a Presiding Arbitrator Chairperson of the Arbitral Tribunal under the arbitration agreement.
It was stated that this would number be deemed or companystrued to be a waiver of the Petitioners right to have the third or Presiding Arbitrator from a neutral companyntry i.e. other than India and Cyprus , the arbitration invoked being an International Commercial Arbitration within the meaning of Section 2 1 f of the Act.
