Shri Pratap Sindhu v. Sh Sumit Mathur

$~11 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 847/2018 SHRI PRATAP SINDHU ..... Petitioner Through Ms.Sonali Malhotra, Adv.

versus SH SUMIT MATHUR ..... Respondent Through None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

O R D E R

% 25.01.2019 I.A. No.1161/2019 This application has been filed by the petitioner seeking appointment of a Substitute Arbitrator in place of the Arbitrator appointed by this Court vide its order dated 03.12.2018.

It is contended that as the appointed Arbitrator has been appointed as a member in the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai, she has expressed her inability to act as an Arbitrator. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a copy of this application was duly served on the respondent. I may only note that the earlier order dated 03.12.2018 was also passed ex-parte with the respondent not entering appearance. I, therefore, do not see any necessity of issuing any further notice of this application to the respondent. In view of the above, while terminating the mandate of the Arbitrator appointed vide order dated 03.12.2018, I appoint Mr.S.K. Tandon, Retired

Additional District & Sessions Judge, Delhi (244, Bank Enclave, Near Laxmi Nagar, Delhi- 110092, Ph: 9811719888, 9717703864, 22048590) as a Substitute Arbitrator for adjudicating the disputes that have arisen between the parties.

The Arbitrator shall give disclosure under Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before proceeding with the reference. The application is allowed in the above terms. Dasti.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J JANUARY 25, 2019/Arya