Punjab-Haryana High CourtM/S Selvel Media Services Pvt. Ltd vs Municipal Corp. Chandigarh And Ors on 18 May, 2017Author:Amit RawalBench:Amit RawalCWP Nos.4163 of 2014,
CWP Nos.13564, 13565 and 13643 of 2015
CWP No.8168 of 2017                                                -1-

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH

1.                                               CWP No.4163 of 2014
                                                 Date of decision : 18.05.2017

M/s Selvel Media Services Pvt. Ltd.

                                                                     ...Petitioner

                                        Versus

The Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh and others

                                                                  ...Respondents

2.                                               CWP No.13564 of 2015
                                                 Date of decision : 18.05.2017

M/s Selvel Media Services Pvt. Ltd.

                                                                     ...Petitioner

                                        Versus

The Municipal Corporation, U.T. Chandigarh and others

                                                                  ...Respondents

3.                                               CWP No.13565 of 2015
                                                 Date of decision : 18.05.2017

M/s Selvel Media Services Pvt. Ltd.

                                                                     ...Petitioner

                                        Versus

The Municipal Corporation, U.T. Chandigarh and others

                                                                  ...Respondents

4.                                               CWP No.13643 of 2015
                                                 Date of decision : 18.05.2017

M/s Selvel Media Services Pvt. Ltd.

                                                                     ...Petitioner


                               1 of 4
            ::: Downloaded on - 06-06-2017 10:33:05 :::
 CWP Nos.4163 of 2014,
CWP Nos.13564, 13565 and 13643 of 2015
CWP No.8168 of 2017                                                 -2-

                                         Versus

The Municipal Corporation, U.T. Chandigarh and others

                                                                   ...Respondents

5.                                                CWP No.8168 of 2017
                                                  Date of decision : 18.05.2017

M/s Outdoor Communication Pvt. Ltd.

                                                                      ...Petitioner

                                         Versus

The Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh and others

                                                                   ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL.

Present:     Mr. Chetan Mittal, Sr. Advocate with
             Mr. Mohinder S. Nain, Advocate for the petitioner.

             Mr. Suvir Sehgal, Advocate and
             Ms. Deepali Puri, Advocate
             for the respondent-Municipal Corporation.

             Mr. Aditya Grover, Advocate for the applicant.

             ****

AMIT RAWAL, J. (Oral)This order of mine shall dispose of aforementioned five writ

petitions.There is dispute between the petitioner and Municipal

Corporation with regard to the charging of the advertisement fees/tax.Mr. Chetan Mittal, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr.

Mohinder S. Nain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submits

that contract does not envisage the charging of the advertisement fees/tax



                                2 of 4::: Downloaded on - 06-06-2017 10:33:06 :::CWP Nos.4163 of 2014,
CWP Nos.13564, 13565 and 13643 of 2015CWP No.8168 of 2017                                              -3-and nor leviable in law which has been disputed and refuted by Mr. Suvir

Sehgal and Ms. Deepali Puri, Advocate. However, concededly agreement

between the parties contains the resolution of dispute through arbitration.In my view, the parties shall be at liberty to seek the

adjudication of the dispute with regard to the aforementioned controversy

by seeking appointment through an independent arbitrator. Both the parties

were conceptualized about the aforementioned issue on the last date of

hearing.Today Mr. Mohinder S. Nain, Advocate on instructions from

his client and Mr. Suvir Sehgal assisted by Ms. Deepali Puri, Advocate, on

the basis of the objection taken in the writ petition do not dispute the

appointment of the independent arbitrator.Accordingly, I hereby appoint former Judge of this Court i.e.

Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Jhanji, as an Arbitrator subject to his convenience

and acceptance to the appointment. On receipt of acceptance, Hon'ble

Arbitrator shall enter into reference by calling upon the parties to adjudicate

the dispute. Fixing of the fees and venue shall be at the discretion of the

Hon'ble Arbitrator. The Hon'ble Arbitrator may make endeavour to decide

the issue as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six

months.In order to seek consent, Registry is directed to send a letter to

Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.K. Jhanji, former Judge of this Court.There is already interim order regarding taking of coercive

measures. That order shall continue till the petitioner files reference within a



                               3 of 4::: Downloaded on - 06-06-2017 10:33:06 :::CWP Nos.4163 of 2014,
CWP Nos.13564, 13565 and 13643 of 2015CWP No.8168 of 2017                                               -4-period of one month from today and also seek an interim relief under

Section 16 of the Act, in essence, interim direction as directed by the Court

will be only till the adjudication of the interim application by the arbitrator.Accordingly, present writ petitions are disposed of.

             In view of the disposal of the present writ petitions, application

for impleadment is also rendered infructuous.18.05.2017                                            (AMIT RAWAL)
Pawan                                                    JUDGE

             Whether speaking/reasoned:-              Yes/No

             Whether reportable:-                     Yes/No




                                4 of 4::: Downloaded on - 06-06-2017 10:33:06 :::