Calcutta High CourtAsish Karel vs Sri Sachin Roy & Anr on 2 July, 2018Author:Ashis Kumar ChakrabortyBench:Ashis Kumar ChakrabortyOD-9
                                AP 201 of 2018

                        IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
                    Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction
                                ORIGINAL SIDE



                                ASISH KAREL
                                   Versus
                           SRI SACHIN ROY & ANR.


   BEFORE:
   The Hon'ble JUSTICE ASHIS KUMAR CHAKRABORTY
   Date : 2nd July, 2018.

                                                                   Appearance:

                                                      Mr.Rajeev Kumar Jain,
                                                    Mr.Abhirup Chakraborty,
                                                     Mr.Apurba Daga, Advs.,
                                                        for the petitioner.


       The Court : In this application underSection 11(6)of the

Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short, "the Act of 1996")

the petitioner has prayed for appointment of an Arbitrator for

adjudication of the disputes between the parties relating to the

registered development agreement dated October 8, 2012.

       From   the   affidavit   of    service    filed    on   behalf   of     the

petitioner on June 20, 2018, it appears that the copy of the

application forwarded to the respondents has been returned by thePostal   authority     with   the    endorsement   "Not    Claimed".         Thus,

service of the application on the respondents is deemed to be

complete.2The    petitioner         has        also       filed        supplementary         affidavit

disclosing         the    original          certified         copy     of        the    development

agreement dated October 8, 2012.                        By a letter dated January 19,

2018 the petitioner informed the respondents of the disputes that

have    arisen       between         them    relating          to     the     said      development

agreement     dated       October      8,    2012      and     nominated          its   Arbitrator.

However, in spite of receipt of the said letter dated January 19,

2018, the respondents have not responded to the same.In view of the facts mentioned above, it is evident that the

existence      of        the     arbitration           agreement            contained       in   the

development agreement dated October 8, 2012 is not in dispute

between      the    parties.           Therefore,         in    view        of    the   provisions

contained in sub-Section(6A) ofSection 11of the Act of 1996, the

present application of the petitioner succeeds.Accordingly,            Mr.     Tanmoy          Mukherjee,           Advocate        of   Bar

Association, Room No. 11 is appointed as the sole arbitrator to

adjudicate     the       disputes       between         the    parties           relating   to   the

development agreement dated October 8, 2012.The learned arbitrator shall be free to fix his fees and to

engage secretarial staff for conducting the arbitral proceeding.

The fees of the arbitrator and the remuneration of the secretarial

staff engaged by the arbitrator shall be borne by the parties in

equal share.3The learned arbitrator is requested to make and publish his

arbitral award within eight months from the date of entering upon

reference by the arbitrator.With the above directions, AP No.201 of 2018 stands disposed

of, without any order as to costs.(ASHIS KUMAR CHAKRABORTY, J.)

SP2/S.Das