Rajalakshmi v. M/S.Central Foods

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 27.01.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH Rajalakshmi .. Petitioner Vs.

M/s.Central Foods Rep. by its Partner Mr.Sasikumar Having office at No.343, 1st Main Road Ambattur SIDCO North Chennai 600 053 .. Respondent For Petitioner : Mr.A.Laxmi Raj Rathnam

O R D E R

When this petition came up for hearing on 18.11.2025, this Court passed the following order:

"This petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') to appoint an arbitrator to resolve the dispute arising out of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated 01.04.2022.

2. The MOU provides for referring the dispute for Arbitration under Clause 18 and the same is extracted hereunder:- "18. ARBITRATION: Any claim or dispute or difference arising out of or its attributable to the interpretation or performance of this MOU, shall be referred to a Sole Arbitrator appointed mutually by the First & Second Party. Such arbitration shall be held in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended from time to time. The decision/any Award given by the Sole Arbitrator shall be final and binding upon the Parties. The Venue of the Arbitration shall be at Chennai. The 1/4

cost of Arbitration shall be shared equally by the parties. The Arbitration shall be conducted in English, Governing law shall be Indian Laws."

3. The trigger notice under Section 21 of the Act was issued on 19.04.2025 and the same has also been received by the respondents. Since there was no response, the present petition has been filed before this Court.

4. Notice to the respondent returnable by 16.12.2025. Private notice is also permitted.

Post this petition for hearing on 16.12.2025." 2.Pursuant to the above order, notice sent to the respondent was returned unserved. Hence, this Court permitted the learned counsel for the petitioner to effect paper publication. Accordingly, paper publication has been effected and the name of the respondent has been printed in the cause list, but, there is no appearance for the respondent either in person or through counsel. 3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the materials available on record.

4.This Court finds that there is a valid agreement between the parties in line with Section 7 of the Act and it contains an arbitration clause. In view of the same, this Court is inclined to appoint an arbitrator and accordingly, Mr.M.B.Raghavan, Advocate, having office at III Floor, Catholic Centre, Armenian Street, Chennai - 600 001 (Mobile No.98400 49037), is appointed 2/4

as sole Arbitrator and the sole Arbitrator is requested to adjudicate the arbitral disputes that had arisen between the parties and render an arbitral award by holding sittings in the Madras High Court Arbitration Centre under the aegis of this Court as per Madras High Court Arbitration Proceedings Rules, 2017 and fee of the sole Arbitrator shall be in accordance with the Madras High Court Arbitration Centre (MHCAC) (Administrative Cost and Arbitrator's Fees) Rules, 2017.

Accordingly, this petition is disposed of.

27.01.2026 gya 3/4

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

gya 27.01.2026 4/4