M/S K S S Petron Pvt Ltd v. M/S Gypsum Structural India Pvt Ltd

$~4 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ FAO(OS) (COMM) 147/2016 M/S K S S PETRON PVT LTD ..... Appellant Represented by :

Mr.K.K.Sharma, Sr.Advocate instructed by Mr.Vinod Wadhwa, Mr.Ayush Chourasia, Advocates versus M/S GYPSUM STRUCTURAL INDIA PVT LTD ..... Respondent Represented by :

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGESH KHANNA

O R D E R

% 23.12.2016 CM No.47989/2016 Allowed subject to just exceptions.

CM Nos.47990-91/2016 For the reasons stated in the two applications 13 days delay in filing and 12 days delay in refiling the appeal are condoned. Applications are allowed.

FAO(OS) (COMM) 147/2016 1.

Before the learned Single Judge the only point urged related to the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator. It was urged that the work order being not signed by the respondent, there would be deemed to be no arbitration agreement between the parties.

Learned Senior Counsel urges that the Arbitrator drew jurisdiction from the work order in question dated July 12, FAO(OS) (COMM) 147/2016

2012.

2.

In paragraph 3.4 of the impugned order the learned Single Judge has noted that after the respondent invoked the arbitration proceedings it filed Arbitration Petition No.36/2014 under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in which proceedings appellant concurred for an Arbitrator to be appointed.

3.

The appellant not having challenged reference being made to the Arbitrator when petition under Section of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was filed and on the contrary having concurred in the appointment of the Arbitrator to decide the dispute between the parties would be estopped from questioning the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator. 4.

No other point is urged in the appeal and indeed cannot be for the reasons before the learned Single Judge the only argument advanced was as aforenoted.

5.

We find no merit in the appeal which is dismissed in limine and therefore there shall be no order as to costs. CM No.47988/2016 Since the main appeal has been dismissed in limine, instant application which seeks stay of the impugned order is dismissed as infructuous.

PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J YOGESH KHANNA, J DECEMBER 23, 2016 skb FAO(OS) (COMM) 147/2016