SOVAN CHATTERJEE v. DAS AND CHATTERJEE ENTERPRISE AND OTHERS
AP/423/2021 · 2026-07-08
Gaurang Kanth
body2021
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2021 DAILYLAW 567 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2021 DAILYLAW 567 (CAL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
OCD-17
ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA COMMERCIAL DIVISION ORIGINAL SIDE
AP/423/2021
SOVAN CHATTERJEE VS DAS AND CHATTERJEE ENTERPRISE AND OTHERS
BEFORE:
The Hon’ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH Date : 8th July, 2026. Appearance: Mr. Suman Kr. Dutt, Sr. Adv. Mr. Sumanta Biswas, Adv. Mr. Shuvasish Sengupta, Adv. Mr. Yashvardhan Kochar, Adv. Mr. Bikash Shaw, Adv. Sk. Saad Islam, Adv. …for the petitioner
Mr. Rahul Karmakar, Adv. Ms. Koel Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Anurag Sardar, Adv. Mr. Mahfur Murshed, Adv. …for the respondents
The Court: The petitioner has preferred the present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a learned Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes arisen between the parties out of a Partnership Deed dated 01.10.2007. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that disputes and differences have arisen between the parties in relation to the said Partnership Deed. It is submitted that the petitioner invoked the arbitration clause contained in Clause 21 of the said Partnership Deed by issuing a notice dated 16.08.2021, calling upon the respondent to take necessary steps for constitution of the arbitral tribunal. 2
It is submitted that the respondent duly replied to the said notice; however, no steps were taken thereafter by the respondent towards constitution of the arbitral tribunal. It is well settled that the scope of examination by this Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is confined to the limited issue of whether a valid arbitration agreement exists between the parties. The parties do not dispute the existence of a valid Partnership Deed, nor do they dispute the existence of the arbitration clause contained therein. The parties have further consented to the appointment of a learned Sole Arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes between them. In view of the aforesaid and having regard to the consent of the parties, this Court appoints Mr. Ayan Banerjee, Advocate (Mob. No. 9830916210) as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The appointment of the learned Sole Arbitrator shall be subject to compliance with the requirements of Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The learned Sole Arbitrator shall be entitled to fix his/her remuneration in accordance with the Fourth Schedule to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, unless otherwise agreed by the parties. A copy of this order shall be communicated by the petitioner to the learned Sole Arbitrator forthwith for necessary action.
It is clarified that all questions relating to the arbitrability of the disputes, the admissibility of the claims, limitation, jurisdiction, and all
3 other issues are left open to be urged before the learned Sole Arbitrator, who shall decide the same in accordance with law. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition stands disposed of. (GAURANG KANTH, J.)
R.Bhar