Raju Chandrasen Pingle v. The Relince Jio Infocom Ltd Regional Office

922-AA-1-2021.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 922 ARBITRATION APPLICATION NO.1 OF 2021 RAJU CHANDRASEN PINGLE

VERSUS

THE RELINCE JIO INFOCOM LTD REGIONAL OFFICE ...

Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Shinde Balaji S. Advocate for Respondent/Sole: Mr. Ajit Kadethankar ...

CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

DATE : 16th July, 2021 PER COURT :

.

Heard Mr. Balaji Shinde, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Kadethankar, learned counsel for respondent/sole. 2.

There is no dispute, that Clause 6 (b) of the agreement of lease, which is in respect of open land, dated 14/12/2017, the execution of which is admitted by the parties hereto, contains an arbitration clause. It is also not disputed, that by a notice dated 11/03/2019, the arbitration clause was invoked. 3.

Mr. Kadethankar, learned counsel for the respondent, does not dispute the receipt of the notice and non-appointment of an Arbitrator.

922-AA-1-2021.odt 4.

In view of the above, Hon'

ble Justice Mr. P. V. Hardas, Former Judge of this Court, is hereby appointed as an Arbitrator, to decide the dispute between the parties. The parties, undertake to appear before him on 30/07/2021. The fees of the Arbitrator shall be in consonance with the schedule in this regard in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

3.

Application is disposed of.

(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.) Sameer