Danveer Singh vs Pawan Kumar Mehta on 1 March, 2025

Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Danveer Singh vs Pawan Kumar Mehta on 1 March, 2025

                                                                 Sr. No. 03

            HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                          AT JAMMU

                                                  Arb P No.48/2022
                                                  CM No.6875/2024

Danveer Singh, Age 36 years                            ....Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s)
S/O Late Surinder Singh
R/O Taraf Manjali,
Tehsil and District Kathua
                      Through :- Mr. G.S. Thakur, Advocate.

         V/s
Pawan Kumar Mehta                                                 ....Respondent(s)
S/O Late Raj Kumar
R/O Ward No.3, Krishna Colony, Near Mahajan
Cycle Mart Opposite DSP School Near Sunil
Chowdhary Chowk Kathua
                Through :- None.
CORAM: HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
                                     ORDER

01.03.2025

CM No.6875/2024

This is an application seeking permission of this court to place on

record certain documents.

On examination coupled with submissions advanced by the learned

counsel for the applicant, the same is allowed and the documents are directed to

be taken on record.

CM No. 6875/2024 is allowed.

Arb P No.48/2022

1. Vide order dated 31.10.2024, this court had directed that this matter

shall be considered finally in absence of objections if the same are not filed

before the next date of hearing. There is no representation on behalf of the

respondent despite service of notice upon him through publication mode in two

newspapers. It shows that the respondent has no objection in case this matter is
2 Arb P No. 48/2022

referred to an independent arbitrator for resolution of disputes arisen between the

parties.

2. I have heard Mr. G.S Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner and

perused the record.

3. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking

appointment of an independent Arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the J&K

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to resolve the dispute that has arisen

between the parties.

4. It is averred in the petition that on 27.02.2012, the respondent and the late

father of the petitioner enter into partnership and started the business under the

name and style of Auto leads Kathua containing Clause 18 for adjudicating

dispute regarding partnership business through arbitration. That on 23.09.2020,

the father of the petitioner who was the partner having 50 percent share in the

partnership expired succeeded by the petitioner. On 07.08.2021, civil suit for

permanent prohibitory injunction was filed by the respondent against the

petitioner with the relief not to interfere in the assets, establishment and working

of business of the partnership. Finally, on 02.09.2022, the petitioner issued

notice under Section 45 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for appointment

of conciliator to decide the dispute pertaining to the partnership and also for

appointment of arbitrator.

5. Clause 18 of the Deed of Partnership provides that all the matters of

dispute regarding partnership business shall be decided by the arbitrators duly

appointed by the partners.

6. Annexure-I to CM No. 6875/2024 is the notice dated 02.09.2022 issued to

the respondent by the petitioner for appointment of conciliator to decide the

dispute pertaining to the partnership M/s Autoleads, Kathua. Through the
3 Arb P No. 48/2022

medium of notice (supra), it was informed to the respondent to suggest the

names of conciliator for the appointment of the impartial and independent

conciliator and inform the petitioner within a period of 30 days from the date of

receipt of the notice. On no action on the part of the respondent, the petitioner

has approached this court by way of filing this petition under Section 11(6) of

the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for appointment of an independent arbitrator

for resolving the disputes between the parties.

7. Perusal of the petition would show that the petitioner has raised certain

claims which, according to the petitioner, have not been addressed by the

respondent, this Court is of the view that a dispute exists between the parties,

which would require resolution.

8. In light of the facts and circumstances of the case, the present petition is

disposed of by appointing Mrs. Rozina Afzal, Advocate, R/O Shahid Villa, Zero

Lane Opp. Wave Mall, Near Jio Call Centre Simula, Vidhata Nagar, Bathindi,

Jammu, to act as the sole Arbitrator who shall proceed in the matter to decide the

dispute between the parties and make an award in accordance with law after

hearing the parties and charging the prescribed fee along with incidental

expenses to be shared by the parties.

9. Parties may raise their claims and counter claims before the Arbitrator.

10. Registry to inform the Ld. Arbitrator accordingly.

11. With the above observation and direction, the petition stands disposed of.

                                                    )          (Tashi Rabstan)
Jammu:                                                          Chief Justice
01.03.2025
Raj Kumar
                   Whether the order is speaking? :         Yes/No.
                   Whether the order is reportable?:        Yes/No.