COURT FEES

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT

JAIPUR.

S.B. ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.………………………………21.

IN THE MATTER OF:

Ms. ARIHANT TRADERS & SUPPLIERS

Office at 184-95, Sector 18, Ground Floor,
Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur.302033
Through their authorized representative Mr. Manish Kumar
Jain

………………………………….APPLICANT

Vs.

1. M/S GRAND CHEMICAL WORKS

Through its Proprietor Akash Sharma
Office GRAND HOUSE,
C-212/2, Phase-II, Mayapuri, New Delhi – 110064

2. Akash Sharma
Proprietor M/S GRAND CHEMICAL WORKS
Office GRAND HOUSE,
C-212/2, Phase-II, Mayapuri, New Delhi – 110064

……………………………………..RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION -11 (6)

OF THE ARBIRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT 2019

1
TO,

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

AND HIS OTHER COMPANION
JUDGES OF THE HIGH COURT OF
JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR.

MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIP

The above named applicant most respectfully and humbly submits

as under-

BRIEF FACTS:

1. That the applicant is a proprietorship firm running in the

name and style of Ms. ARIHANT TRADERS & SUPPLIERS and
having its office at 184-95, Sector 18, Ground Floor, Pratap
Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur.302033, This firm is mainly engaged
in the business of trading of disinfectants and other allied
products since long and had been mainly engaged in the sale
and supply of various products manufactured by the
respondent since long.

2. That the respondent M/S GRAND CHEMICAL WORKS is

having their Office at GRAND HOUSE, C-212/2, Phase-II,
Mayapuri, New Delhi -110064 & which is manufacturing
various types of disinfectants and other allied products and
supplying to agents appointed at various places throughout
the country thereby procuring sales through these agents
under settled terms and conditions.
3. That vide a letter bearing no. GCW/2012-
13/Letter/114.Dated 19.12.13 addressed to the applicant the
respondent appointed the applicant as their distributor of

2
 their products for Jaipur & Sanganer (Rajasthan) markets and
made a whole sole selling agent for the Govt. & others as
well on settled terms. Upon which the applicant continued
the business and started efforting hard for the sale and
supplies promoting the business of the respondent highly
and procuring utmost profits. A copy of this letter bearing
no. GCW/2012- 13/Letter/114.Dated 19.12.13 is annexed
herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-1

4. That a Consignee agreement dated-11.01.2016 was also duly

executed between the parties in this respect. The business as
stated continued to run. A copy of this Consignee agreement
dated-11.01.2016 is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE-2

5. That finding certain difficulties and non-co-operation as well

as non-payments the applicant then raised his grievances to
the respondents by way of sending a mail dated 30.06.2019
stating that neither any heed nor any response of any kind is
being advanced in any manner from the side of respondents
in favor of the applicant despite repeated intimations
requests & complaints. As such it was contended to the
respondent that in these circumstances the applicant is left
in a situation of discontinuing the business when no further
losses are now bearable therefore intimation to stop further
business was given to the respondents & representation was
called upon in this respect. This mail was received by the
respondents. A copy of this mail dated 30.06.2019 is
annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-3

6. That an E-mail response was then sent by the respondents

to the applicant vide mail dated 01.07.2019 and it was
misstated that the applicant has made a mention that he is

3
 not able to work as Super Stockist for the state of Rajasthan
and also alleged that the applicant is making continuous loss.
As such the respondents accepted the proposal of stopping
work with the applicant. In the situation the current stock
position as well as current outstanding’s with RDS channel
(only RSM) were demanded for reconciling. A copy of this
mail dated 01.07.2019 is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE-4

7. That again in response to the reply mail sent by the

respondent another letter dated 02.07.2019 was then sent
by the applicant to the respondents pointing out the
incorrect and deliberate assertion that the respondents have
face losses by the Super Stockist. & further pointing out that
the losses if any have been incurred by the causes of the
improper and undue behaviors and actions of one Praveer
Srivastava for which time and again the Managing Director of
the respondent company was repeatedly informed. But
every time it was ignored. Illustrations of the various losses
were attached with this letter in details in the form of a
statement. A copy of this letter dated 02.07.2019 is annexed
herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-5

8. That no response of any kind in either form came forward

from the side of the respondents.

9. That another letter dated 02.07.2019 was also addressed to

the respondent by the applicant asking the veracity of the
circulation from the side of the respondents to the entire
concerned dealers for stopping payments to the applicant. In
this respect it was also pointed out that the applicant is
receiving messages from the side of the dealers enquiring
who gave the powers to issue such circulars to the dealers on

4
 behalf of the respondent company. The consequence of such
circulars and their effects were much derogatory to the
reputation of the applicant in the business causing much loss
and damages in so many manners. The applicant reserves
the rights to take action of defamation and causing undue
losses and damages separately in this respect. The
respondent company is wholly liable criminally as well as in
civil nature, for which has become liable. A copy of this letter
dated 02.07.2019 is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE-6

10. That another letter dated 07.07.2019 was then delivered by

the applicant addressed to the respondent company in
reference to the a Consignee agreement dated-11.01.2016 it
was stated in this letter reminding that in continuation of the
business since past and all the mutual communications you
have sent a letter dated 28.06.2019and according to which a
demand of Rs. 2319457.00 has been made from the
applicant. It was further stated here that in the past the
respondents have been already apprised that demand from
the RDS is continuously being repeated and continued
constantly but no payment of any sort is coming forth. Also
side by side it is also being highlighted that the cost of
transportation is costing heavily and day by day increasing
causing heavy expenditure. Further it was also pointed out
that it is wrong to state that company/respondents are
suffering losses from the applicant rather the respondents
have been severally and repeatedly pointed that the origin of
loss is occurring from the side of the respondents only for
which the applicant is being made to suffer the elaborate
details had also been given in the past but to no avail.
Repeated information to Praveer Kumar the respondents
representative were being given and to resolve the

5
 discrepancies and issues involved.as such the applicant
having no other option had to choose for stopping and
discontinuing the said business with the respondent. Further
it was also informed through all the concerned dealers that
respondents have given and passed strict instructions for not
making any payment to the applicant. All these facts and
circumstances have been accurately detailed and informed
to the respondent but no action or response of any kind
came forward to the applicant. Further it was alleged by the
applicant by such circulations within the dealers from the
side of the respondents he applicant has been made to suffer
not only business damages and losses but has cause mental
agony and undue harassments. Lastly it was stated to resolve
the issue and to come forward for compensating with the
loss and damages suffered by the applicant. Further to
maintain good relationship. A copy of this letter dated
07.07.2019 is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-
7

11. That another letter then was communicated on 13.07.2019

which was in reference to the minutes of meting during the
visit of Praveer Srivastava –RSM (North) by which various
points of issues during the meeting dated 13.07.2018 were
discussed and were pointed out in seven para mentioned in
this letter and in which it was conclusively admitted to offer
an amount of Rs. 1209980 in three parts that is Rs. 3.50 Lac
current date cheque and rest mount in equal amounts within
one week but this amount had been not accepted by the
applicant and on the contrary demanded a meeting on
20.07.2019 with the heads of the respondents t finally
reconcile the ledger. A copy of this letter 13.07.2019 is
annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-8

6
12. That a letter was also issued by the applicant to the
respondent on 13.07.2019 in the light of meeting dated
13.07.2019 informing that Mr. Praveer Srivastava has agreed
on the points mentioned in this letter on the behalf of the
respondent company the details of this letter contains all the
points in the issue. A copy of this letter 13.07.2019 is
annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-9

13. That despite all such when nothing came forward from the
side of the respondents then the applicant sent a letter
dated 14.07.2019 addressed to the respondent and by which
a demand of settling the accounts was advance and a
request was made to refrain from spreading frivolous and
malafide messages in the market tarnishing the reputation of
the applicant as well as widely spread instructions for not
collecting the money directly from the dealers on behalf of
the applicant. c

14. That on 15.07.2019 a letter was circulated to all the

dealers’ //channel partners informing the change in
distribution modes by the respondents. It was stated in this
letter that the respondents have changed the business
module in Rajasthan and the management has now decided
that all the business activities will be done directly with
existing distributors /channel partners instead of the
applicant as called super Stockist, Instructions were passed
that all the further orders shall be placed to respondents
only, meaning thereby the applicant had totally been
discarded from business. Furthermore it was also directed
that all the current outstanding’s to the applicant shall be
routed to the respondents. Further methodology to be
applied was also stated in this letter. A copy of this letter

7
 15.07.2019 is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-
11

15. That upon receipt of the aforesaid letter dated 15.07.2019 a

reply dated 19.07.2019 was then sent wherein it was mainly
stated that there is no mutual agreement regarding the
recovery of outstanding dues of RS. 71, 7,517.00 to be
recovered by Praveen & moreover the recovery from the
market is much more than the amount stated. It was also
pointed out that the respondent who stated to send the
details of outstanding’s were never sent to the applicant.
Mention was also made of handing over of eleven cartons
back to the respondents with no credit note; neither any
explanation regarding clearances of were Rs. 1.33 Lacs by
Praveer explained and the applicant made his desire to meet
personally. A copy of this letter dated 15.07.2019 is annexed
herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-12

16. That the respondents on 22.12.2019 addressed a letter to

the applicant making a reference of outstanding dues of Rs.
22, 44,457.00 and previous discussion and referring the
letter dated 13.07.2019 sent by the non-applicants and the
applicant’s letter dated 19.07.2019. This letter dated
22.12.2019 which had been received by the applicant. It was
stated in this letter that the amount of Rs. 22, 44,457.00 has
still not been received and the above amount was demanded
with over dues as mentioned. It was further stated that in
case no payment is made in the next ten days legal action
shall be initiated and an interest @ of 24% shall be levied. A
statement of account was also enclosed. A copy of this letter
dated 22.12.2019 is annexed herewith and marked as
ANNEXURE-13.

8
17. That in response to letter dated 22.12.2019 once again in the
light of all the above and repeating and reminding all the
expressions of the applicant and also appending the latest
statement of account to be settled the respondent was
desired to come forward and settle the dispute by arbitration
as per agreement and in his context a letter dated
04.01.2021 was then addressed by the applicant to the
respondent and sent by registered post as well as by E-Mail.
The letter by Regd. Post was returned un-received. A copy of
this letter dated 04.01.2021 is annexed herewith and marked
as ANNEXURE-14.

18. That in response to the aforesaid letter dated 22.12.2019

another letter dated 16.01.20 was then sent to the
respondents by the applicant pointing out all he
past/previous communications and stating that the amount
of Rs. 22,44,457.00 being demanded by the respondent is
miscalculated and deliberately made. The account as per the
applicant’s records is different and much less than the
amount demanded. A detailed statement had been prepared
by the applicant and appended with the letter and according
to which an amount of Rs. 8, 27,681.00 is still pending and
for which the applicant is ready and willing to sit to-gether
and settle the accounts. A letter dated15.01 2021 was then
addressed by the applicant to the respondent and sent by
registered post as well as by E-Mail. The letter by Regd. Post
was returned un-received. A copy of this letter dated
15.01.20 is annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE-15

19. That the applicant raised the aforesaid letters on dated

04.01.2021 and dated 15.01.2021 vide various

9
 communications, but to no avail. Therefore a dispute has

arisen between the parties which is required to be referred

to Sole Arbitration in consonance with Clause 20 of

consignee agreement vide Annexure-2

20. That now when no action or response is coming forth from

the side of respondents the applicant is left with no other

alternative except to demand for the appointment of

arbitrator from this Hon’ble Court. In the presence of

arbitration agreement mentioned in the consignee

agreement dated 11.06.2016 vide ANNEXURE-2 under clause

20 of the agreement which provides that arbitration clause

shall apply to this agreement. However, from a bare

perusal of the aforesaid clause it is evident that the applicant

was bound to get the dispute adjudicated by arbitration as

provided in ANNEXURE-2 In the present facts and

circumstances, the applicant apprehends that the

respondent non-applicant would not appoint a neutral and

unbiased arbitrator and such appointment would give rise to

justifiable doubts as to the independence and impartially of

the Arbitrator.

21. That in terms of Section 12 of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act 1996 any Arbitration required to be

appointed should be an independent or impartial Arbitrator

and should have no relation with any of the parties which

may give rise to the justifiable doubts as to the

10
 independence or impartiality of Arbitrators in any manner as

provided under the 5th Schedule of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act-1996.

22. That in view of the aforesaid facts, circumstances and

documents placed on record, it is amply clear that dispute

pertaining to the Consignee agreement vide Annexure-2 has

arisen between the parties and therefore, the applicant on

04.01.2021 as well as on 15.01.2021 issued a request/notice

via e-mail and Registered Ad Post addressed to the non-

applicant respondent which were not received and returned.

However, even after the lapse Notice timing immediately,

the respondents have failed to act upon the request and

have neither appointed any independent arbitrator nor have

formed any panel of arbitrators so far, and as such,

therefore, have knowingly and willingly, forfeited their right

to do the same under the agreement.

23. That, under such circumstances, the applicant has

approached this Hon'ble Court for the appointment of an

independent and unbiased arbitrator under the provisions of

section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996.

And for this purpose the applicant proposes the name of any

Retired judge of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court and

Retired DJ Cadre, as this Hon'ble Court may deem

appropriate, to be arbitrator in the said matter.

11
24. That subsequent to the appointment of an independent and

impartial arbitrator, to the applicant reserves his right to

submit its detailed statement of claim before the appointed

arbitrator.

25. That this has been clearly and very specifically mentioned in

the introductory of the consignee agreement vide Annexure-

2 that the entire business relationship is confined to the

areas in RAJASTHAN STATE the relevant portion is being

reproduced hereafter in inverted comas ‘dealing in the

company products in the markets of RAJASTHAN STATE’. This

has also been emphasized in the clause-2 of the consignee

agreement too vide Annexure-2

26. That furthermore the office/workplace of the applicant is

situated in Jaipur Rajasthan as above detailed from where all

the business activities are controlled and operated upon.

27. That also since there is no mention of the seat of arbitration

especially in clause 20 in the consignee agreement vide

Annexure-2 which has been executed between the parties as

such the present petition is being preferred before this

Hon’ble Court.

28. That this Hon’ble Court has got jurisdiction to entertain this

application

29. That the applicant therefore craves leave to approach this

Hon'ble High Court with a prayer for setting up an Arbitral

tribunal under section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation

12
 Act 1996 and for referring the disputes between the parties

to the consignee agreement vide Annexure-2 for

adjudication.

30. A proper Court fees as per rules has been paid on this

application.

31. That the present application has been filed within the period

of prescribed limitation.

RELIEF OR REMEDY SOUGHT

It is therefore most respectfully prayed that the present

application may kindly be allowed and an independent and

impartial arbitrator to resolve the dispute in arbitration

proceedings may kindly be appointed.

Any other order as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in

the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in

favor of the applicant.

Cost of this application be awarded in favor of the applicant.

Yours’ Humble applicant

Through counsel;

Jaipur
Anil Khanna
Advocate
Email – Anil@khannaandassociates.com
Enroll No – R/425/1980 Mobile - 9828100560
29[205], A-Block- Lawyers Chamber,
Rajasthan High Court Building,
Jaipur

Notes:

13
a. That no such petition has been filed prior to this either
before the Hon’ble Supreme Court or this Hon’ble court

b. Since pie papers are not readily available hence stout papers
have been used.

c. That notices extra sets and P.F. shall be filed as per directions
of this Hon’ble court.

d. That this has been typed by my private steno typist who is

not an employee of this Hon’ble Court.

e. That this matter pertains to the challenges coming under the

jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Bench.

Counsel for the petitioner.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT

JAIPUR.

S.B. ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.………………………………21.

IN THE MATTER OF:

Ms. ARIHANT TRADERS & SUPPLIERS

Office at 184-95, Sector 18, Ground Floor,
Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur.302033
Through their authorized representative Mr. Manish Kumar
Jain

………………………………….APPLICANT

Vs.

14
 3. M/S GRAND CHEMICAL WORKS
Through its Proprietor Akash Sharma
Office GRAND HOUSE,
C-212/2, Phase-II, Mayapuri, New Delhi – 110064

4. Akash Sharma
Proprietor M/S GRAND CHEMICAL WORKS
Office GRAND HOUSE,
C-212/2, Phase-II, Mayapuri, New Delhi – 110064

……………………………………..RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION -11 (6)

OF THE ARBIRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT 2019

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF APPLICATION

I, Manish Kumar Jain S/o Sh. MAHESH JAIN, Aged

about...years, authorized representative Ms. ARIHANT
TRADERS & SUPPLIERS , Office at 184-95, Sector 18, Ground
Floor, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur.302033
, do hereby take oath and state as under:-

1. That being the authorized representative of the applicant. I

know and I have made myself acquainted with the facts and
circumstances of the case and I am able to depose thereto. I
am well conversant with the facts of the case and am
therefore competent to swear this affidavit. I am competent
to affirm and I do affirm and declare and verify on behalf of
the petitioner.

2. That the statements contained in paragraphs 1 to 31 of the

foregoing petition are true to my knowledge based on
records maintained by the applicant and believed by me to
be true

15
3. That I have gone through and fully understood the
averments made in the annexed application which has been
drafted by my counsel in the presence and under my
instructions.
4. That annexed application has been drafted by the counsel
under my instructions, which is true and correct to the best
of my knowledge based on office record and legal advice
tendered to me by the counsel.

Jaipur
Dated DEPONENT

VERIFICATION

I, the above named Deponent do hereby verify that the aforesaid

affidavit is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, belief and
I have not suppressed any material therein, so help me GOD.

Jaipur
Dated DEPONENT

16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR.

S.B. ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.………………………………21.

IN THE MATTER OF:

Ms. ARIHANT TRADERS & SUPPLIERS

Office at 184-95, Sector 18, Ground Floor,
Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur.302033
Through their authorized representative Mr. Manish Kumar
Jain

………………………………….APPLICANT

Vs.

1. M/S GRAND CHEMICAL WORKS

Through its Proprietor Akash Sharma
Office GRAND HOUSE,
C-212/2, Phase-II, Mayapuri, New Delhi – 110064

2. Akash Sharma
Proprietor M/S GRAND CHEMICAL WORKS
Office GRAND HOUSE,
C-212/2, Phase-II, Mayapuri, New Delhi – 110064

……………………………………..RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION -11 (6)

OF THE ARBIRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT 2019

AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF DOCUMENTS

I, Manish Kumar Jain S/o Sh. MAHESH JAIN, Aged

about...years, authorized representative Ms. ARIHANT
TRADERS & SUPPLIERS , Office at 184-95, Sector 18, Ground
Floor, Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur.302033
, do hereby take oath and state as under:-

17
1. That being the authorized representative of the applicant. I
am well conversant with the facts of the case and am
therefore competent to swear this affidavit.

2. That annexed Annexure- 1 to 15 are photocopies of their

originals.

Jaipur
Dated DEPONENT

VERIFICATION

I, the above named Deponent do hereby verify that the aforesaid

affidavit is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, belief and
I have not suppressed any material therein, so help me GOD.

Jaipur
Dated
DEPONENT

18
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT
JAIPUR.

S.B. ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.………………………………21.

IN THE MATTER OF:

Ms. ARIHANT TRADERS & SUPPLIERS

Office at 184-95, Sector 18, Ground Floor,
Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur.302033
Through their authorized representative Mr. Manish Kumar
Jain

………………………………….APPLICANT

Vs.

1. M/S GRAND CHEMICAL WORKS

Through its Proprietor Akash Sharma
Office GRAND HOUSE,
C-212/2, Phase-II, Mayapuri, New Delhi – 110064

2. Akash Sharma
Proprietor M/S GRAND CHEMICAL WORKS
Office GRAND HOUSE,
C-212/2, Phase-II, Mayapuri, New Delhi – 110064

……………………………………..RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION -11 (6)

OF THE ARBIRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT 2019

INDEX

S. No. Particulars Page No

1. Memo of application

19
 2. Affidavit in support of application
3. Affidavit in support of Document
4. DOCUMENTS:

Annexure-1 Letter bearing no.

GCW/2012-
13/Letter/114.Dated
19.12.13
Annexure-2 Consignee agreement dated-
11.01.

Annexure-3 mail dated 30.06.2019

Annexure-4 Mail dated 01.07.

Annexure-5 letter dated 02.07.2019

Annexure-6 Letter dated 02.07.

Annexure-7 letter dated 07.07.2019

Annexure-8 letter 13.07.2019

Annexure-9 letter 13.07.2019

Annexure-10 letter 13.07.2019

Annexure-11 letter 15.07.2019

Annexure-12 letter dated 15.07.2019

Annexure-13 letter dated 22.12.2019

Annexure-14 letter dated 04.01.2021

Annexure-15 letter dated 15.01.20

Jaipur
Dated

20
 COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT

JAIPUR.

S.B. ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.………………………………21.

IN THE MATTER OF:

Ms. ARIHANT TRADERS & SUPPLIERS

Office at 184-95, Sector 18, Ground Floor,
Pratap Nagar, Sanganer, Jaipur.302033
Through their authorized representative Mr. Manish Kumar
Jain

………………………………….APPLICANT

Vs.

1. M/S GRAND CHEMICAL WORKS

Through its Proprietor Akash Sharma
Office GRAND HOUSE,
C-212/2, Phase-II, Mayapuri, New Delhi – 110064

2. Akash Sharma
Proprietor M/S GRAND CHEMICAL WORKS
Office GRAND HOUSE,

21
 C-212/2, Phase-II, Mayapuri, New Delhi – 110064

……………………………………..RESPONDENTS

APPLICATION UNDER SECTION -11 (6)

OF THE ARBIRATION AND
CONCILIATION ACT 2019
SYNOPSIS

1. Provisions under Section 11 sub section (6) a of the

which the Arbitration & conciliation Act, 1996.
application, is filed.

2. Name (s) of the Ms. ARIHANT TRADERS & SUPPLIERS

applicant (s) with
Office at 184-95, Sector 18, Ground
complete address
Floor,
(es)
Pratap Nagar, Sanganer,
Jaipur.302033

through their authorized

representative Mr. Manish Kumar Jain

3. Name (s) of the 1. M/S GRAND CHEMICAL WORKS

other parties to the Through its Proprietor
arbitration
Akash Sharma
Agreement with
complete Office GRAND HOUSE,
addresses.
C-212/2, Phase-II, Mayapuri,

New Delhi – 11006

22
 2. Akash Sharma

Office GRAND HOUSE,

C-212/2, Phase-II, Mayapuri,

New Delhi – 11006

3. Name and address N.A.

of the Arbitrators,
if any, already
appointed by the
party/ies.

4. Name and address Sole Arbitrator to be appointed --

of the person or Retired High Court Judge/Retired DJ
institution, if any, Rank, Jaipur.
to known any
function has been
entrusted by the
parties to the
arbitration
agreement under
the appointment
procedure agreed
upon by them.

5. Qualification N.A.
required, if any, of
the arbitrator by
the agreement of
the parties.

6. Arbitration Clause 20 of Consignee Agreement

Agreement relied dated 06.04.2016.

23
 upon in the
contract.

1. That the applicant raised the aforesaid letters on dated

04.01.2021 and dated 15.01.2021 vide various

communications, but to no avail. Therefore a dispute has

arisen between the parties which is required to be referred

to Sole Arbitration in consonance with Clause 20 of

consignee agreement vide Annexure-2

2. That now when no action or response is coming forth from

the side of respondents the applicant is left with no other

alternative except to demand for the appointment of

arbitrator from this Hon’ble Court. In the presence of

arbitration agreement mentioned in the consignee

agreement dated 11.06.2016 vide ANNEXURE-2 under clause

20 of the agreement which provides that arbitration clause

shall apply to this agreement. However, from a bare

perusal of the aforesaid clause it is evident that the applicant

was bound to get the dispute adjudicated by arbitration as

provided in ANNEXURE-2 In the present facts and

circumstances, the applicant apprehends that the

respondent non-applicant would not appoint a neutral and

unbiased arbitrator and such appointment would give rise to

24
 justifiable doubts as to the independence and impartially of

the Arbitrator.

3. That in terms of Section 12 of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act 1996 any Arbitration required to be

appointed should be an independent or impartial Arbitrator

and should have no relation with any of the parties which

may give rise to the justifiable doubts as to the

independence or impartiality of Arbitrators in any manner as

provided under the 5th Schedule of the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act-1996.

4. That in view of the aforesaid facts, circumstances and

documents placed on record, it is amply clear that dispute

pertaining to the Consignee agreement vide Annexure-2 has

arisen between the parties and therefore, the applicant on

04.01.2021 as well as on 15.01.2021 issued a request/notice

via e-mail and Registered Ad Post addressed to the non-

applicant respondent which were not received and returned.

However, even after the lapse Notice timing immediately,

the respondents have failed to act upon the request and

have neither appointed any independent arbitrator nor have

formed any panel of arbitrators so far, and as such,

therefore, have knowingly and willingly, forfeited their right

to do the same under the agreement.

5. That, under such circumstances, the applicant has

approached this Hon'ble Court for the appointment of an

25
 independent and unbiased arbitrator under the provisions of

section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996.

And for this purpose the applicant proposes the name of any

Retired judge of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court and

Retired DJ Cadre, as this Hon'ble Court may deem

appropriate, to be arbitrator in the said matter.

6. That this has been clearly and very specifically mentioned in

the introductory of the consignee agreement vide Annexure-

2 that the entire business relationship is confined to the

areas in RAJASTHAN STATE the relevant portion is being

reproduced hereafter in inverted comas ‘dealing in the

company products in the markets of RAJASTHAN STATE’. This

has also been emphasized in the clause-2 of the consignee

agreement too vide Annexure-2

7. That furthermore the office/workplace of the applicant is

situated in Jaipur Rajasthan as above detailed from where all

the business activities are controlled and operated upon.

8. That also since there is no mention of the seat of arbitration

especially in clause 20 in the consignee agreement vide

Annexure-2 which has been executed between the parties as

such the present petition is being preferred before this

Hon’ble Court.

9. That this Hon’ble Court has got jurisdiction to entertain this

application

26
10. That the applicant therefore craves leave to approach this

Hon'ble High Court with a prayer for setting up an Arbitral

tribunal under section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation

Act 1996 and for referring the disputes between the parties

to the consignee agreement vide Annexure-2 for

adjudication.

---------Hence, this Arbitration Application.

Jaipur
Dated

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT

27
 11. APPOINTMENT OF ARBITRATORS.—
(1) A person of any nationality may be an arbitrator, unless otherwise
agreed by the parties.

(2) Subject to sub-section (6), the parties are free to agree on a

procedure for appointing the arbitrator or arbitrators.

(3) Failing any agreement referred to in sub-section (2), in an arbitration

with three arbitrators, each party shall appoint one arbitrator, and the
two appointed arbitrators shall appoint the third arbitrator who shall act
as the presiding arbitrator.

(4) If the appointment procedure in sub-section (3) applies and— (a) a

party fails to appoint an arbitrator within thirty days from the receipt of a
request to do so from the other party; or (b) the two appointed
arbitrators fail to agree on the third arbitrator within thirty days from the
date of their appointment, the appointment shall be made, upon request
of a party, by 1 [the Supreme Court or, as the case may be, the High
Court or any person or institution designated by such Court];

(5) Failing any agreement referred to in sub-section (2), in an arbitration

with a sole arbitrator, if the parties fail to agree on the arbitrator within
thirty days from receipt of a request by one party from the other party to
so agree the appointment shall be made, upon request of a party, by 1
[the Supreme Court or, as the case may be, the High Court or any person
or institution designated by such Court].

(6) Where, under an appointment procedure agreed upon by the parties,

—

(a) a party fails to act as required under that procedure; or

(b) the parties, or the two appointed arbitrators, fail to

reach an agreement expected of them under that
procedure; or

(c) a person, including an institution, fails to perform any

function entrusted to him or it under that procedure, a
party may request 1 [the Supreme Court or, as the case
may be, the High Court or any person or institution
designated by such Court] to take the necessary measure,
unless the agreement on the appointment procedure
provides other means for securing the appointment.

2 [(6A)

The Supreme Court or, as the case may be, the High Court, while
considering any application under sub-section (4) or sub-section

28
 (5) or sub-section (6), shall, notwithstanding any judgment,
decree or order of any Court, confine to the examination of the
existence of an arbitration agreement.

(6B) The designation of any person or institution by the Supreme

Court or, as the case may be, the High Court, for the purposes of
this section shall not be regarded as a delegation of judicial power
by the Supreme Court or the High Court.]

(7) A decision on a matter entrusted by sub-section (4) or sub-section (5)

or sub-section (6) to 3 [the Supreme Court or, as the case may be, the
High Court or the person or institution designated by such Court is final
and no appeal including Letters Patent Appeal shall lie against such
decision]. 1. Subs. by Act 3 of 2016, s. 6, for “the Chief Justice or any
person or institution designated by him” (w. e. f. 23-10-2015). 2. Ins. by s.
6, ibid. (w.e.f. 23-10-2015). 3. Subs. by s. 6, ibid., for “the Chief Justice or
the person or institution designated by him is final” (w.e.f. 23-10-2015).

10 1 [(8) The Supreme Court or, as the case may be, the High Court or the
person or institution designated by such Court, before appointing an
arbitrator, shall seek a disclosure in writing from the prospective
arbitrator in terms of sub-section (1) of section 12, and have due regard
to— (a) any qualifications required for the arbitrator by the agreement of
the parties; and (b) the contents of the disclosure and other
considerations as are likely to secure the appointment of an independent
and impartial arbitrator.]

(9) In the case of appointment of sole or third arbitrator in an

international commercial arbitration, 2 [the Supreme Court or the person
or institution designated by that Court] may appoint an arbitrator of a
nationality other than the nationalities of the parties where the parties
belong to different nationalities.

3 [(10) The Supreme Court or, as the case may be, the High Court, may
make such scheme as the said Court may deem appropriate for dealing
with matters entrusted by sub-section (4) or sub-section (5) or sub-
section (6), to it.]

11) Where more than one request has been made under sub-
section (4) or sub-section (5) or sub-section (6) to the Chief
Justices of different High Courts or their designates, 4
[different High Courts or their designates, the High Court or its
designate to whom the request has been first made] under the
relevant sub-section shall alone be competent to decide on the
request.

5 [(12) (a) Where the matters referred to in sub-sections (4),

(5), (6), (7), (8) and sub-section (10) arise in an international

29
commercial arbitration, the reference to the “Supreme Court
or, as the case may be, the High Court” in those sub-sections
shall be construed as a reference to the “Supreme Court”; and
(b) Where the matters referred to in sub-sections (4), (5), (6),
(7), (8) and sub-section (10) arise in any other arbitration, the
reference to “the Supreme Court or, as the case may be, the
High Court” in those sub-sections shall be construed as a
reference to the “High Court” within whose local limits the
principal Civil Court referred to in clause (e) of sub-section (1)
of section 2 is situate, and where the High Court itself is the
Court referred to in that clause, to that High Court.]

6 [(13) An application made under this section for

appointment of an arbitrator or arbitrators shall be disposed of
by the Supreme Court or the High Court or the person or
institution designated by such Court, as the case may be, as
expeditiously as possible and an endeavour shall be made to
dispose of the matter within a period of sixty days from the
date of service of notice on the opposite party.

(14) For the purpose of determination of the fees of the

arbitral tribunal and the manner of its payment to the arbitral
tribunal, the High Court may frame such rules as may be
necessary, after taking into consideration the rates specified in
the Fourth Schedule. Explanation.—For the removal of doubts,
it is hereby clarified that this sub-section shall not apply to
international commercial arbitration and in arbitrations (other
than international commercial arbitration) in case where
parties have agreed for determination of fees as per the rules
of an arbitral institution.]

30