Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as Act”) to “the refer the dispute to an arbitrator in terms of clause 69 of the agreement. By order dated 4.11.2008, the learned trial court allowed the application of the opposite party. To appreciate the rival contentions, it is apt to quote clause 68 and 69 of the agreement. This Agreement has been made in Bhubaneswar and all “68. payments thereunder be due and made in Bhubaneswar, unless otherwise directed by the Corporation. The Courts in the city of Calcutta alone shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit, application or other proceeding in respect of any claim or dispute arising under this agreement. 69. Any dispute or difference of any nature whatsoever or regarding any right, liability act, omission or account of any of the parties hereto arising out of or in relation to this Agreement shall be referred to the sole arbitration of the Director Marketing of the Corporation, or of some Officer of the Corporation who may be nominated by the Director Marking. The Dealer will not be entitled to raise any objection to any such arbitrator on the ground that the arbitrator is an officer of the Corporation or that he has to deal with the matters to which the contract relates or that in the course of his duties as an officer of the Corporation he had expressed views on all or any of the matters in dispute or difference. In the event of the arbitrator to whom the matter is originally referred being transferred or vacating his office or being unable to act for any reason the Director Marketing as aforesaid at the time of such transfer, vacation of office or inability to act. shall designate another person to at as arbitrator in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. Such person shall be entitled to proceed with the reference from the point at which it was left by his predecessor. It is also a term of this contract that no person other than the Director Marketing or a person nominated by such
Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) to refer the dispute to an arbitrator in terms of clause 69 of the agreement. By order dated 4.11.2008, the learned trial court allowed the application of the opposite party. To appreciate the rival contentions, it is apt to quote clause 68 and 69 of the agreement. “68. This Agreement has been made in Bhubaneswar and all payments thereunder be due and made in Bhubaneswar, unless otherwise directed by the Corporation. The Courts in the city of Calcutta alone shall have jurisdiction to entertain any suit, application or other proceeding in respect of any claim or dispute arising under this agreement. 69. Any dispute or difference of any nature whatsoever or regarding any right, liability act, omission or account of any of the parties hereto arising out of or in relation to this Agreement shall be referred to the sole arbitration of the Director Marketing of the Corporation, or of some Officer of the Corporation who may be nominated by the Director Marking. The Dealer will not be entitled to raise any objection to any such arbitrator on the ground that the arbitrator is an officer of the Corporation or that he has to deal with the matters to which the contract relates or that in the course of his duties as an officer of the Corporation he had expressed views on all or any of the matters in dispute or difference. In the event of the arbitrator to whom the matter is originally referred being transferred or vacating his office or being unable to act for any reason the Director Marketing as aforesaid at the time of such transfer, vacation of office or inability to act. shall designate another person to at as arbitrator in accordance with the terms of the Agreement. Such person shall be entitled to proceed with the reference from the point at which it was left by his predecessor. It is also a term of this contract that no person other than the Director Marketing or a person nominated by such