Sr. No. 11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR (THROUGH VIRTUAL MODE) Arb P 45/2025 Narayan Dass …Petitioner(s)/appellant(s) Through: Mr. Sajid Ahmad Bhat, Advocate Vs. J&K Tourism Development Corporation ...Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Faheem Nissar Shah, GA. CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE O R D E R 07-11-2025 1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of an arbitrator. 2. The petitioner claims to be the licensee of the respondent in possession of shop no.1 situated at Hotel Heemal, Boulevard, Srinagar, for the last 17 years. Earlier, a dispute had arisen between the parties and eventually the dispute came to be settled by way of an arbitration and in terms of the award, the parties executed a fresh lease deed/license agreement on 21.08.2017 for a period of 10 years. It is stated that while the petitioner was running his business pursuant to the fresh lease deed/license agreement (supra), the Respondent Corporation without any justification has revoked the lease deed and cancelled the allotment in terms of order dated 02.04.2025. The said revocation is stated to be in violation of Clauses 5 and 6 of the lease deed. Subsequently, owing to the termination of the contract, the petitioner served a notice dated 07.07.2025, invoking clause 50 of the lease agreement/contract, seeking appointment of an arbitrator to settle the dispute between the parties. The notice was responded to by the respondent Corporation vide communication dated 18.07.2025 whereby the request of the petitioner for appointment of an arbitrator was declined, inter alia, on the ground that application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, preferred by the petitioner before the Principal District Judge, Srinagar, has been dismissed on 04.06.2025. Since no arbitrator was appointed by the respondents within the prescribed time, hence the petition at hand. 3. Heard. Notice. 4. Served with advance copy of the petition, Mr. Hakim Aman Ali, learned Dy. AG, present in Court, accepts notice. 5. The existence of the arbitration clause, as aforesaid, and its invocation by the petitioner vide notice dated 07.07.2025, is not disputed. 6. Thus, in the given circumstances, learned counsel for the respondents, as always, fairly submits that let an arbitrator be appointed. But since the claim that is sought to be made by the petitioner is vehemently disputed/ denied, it is submitted that respondent be granted liberty to raise all possible pleas/ objections before the arbitral tribunal/ arbitrator in this regard. 7. Accordingly, in the wake of the position sketched out above and in terms of the statements made by the learned counsel for the parties, the petition is allowed. And, with consent of learned counsel for the parties, Mr. Justice M. K. Hanjura, Former Judge of the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, is appointed as the sole arbitrator. Who shall proceed with the matter in accordance with the provisions of the Act. And to make an award within the time provided in the Act itself after charging the prescribed fee along with incidental expenses to be shared by the parties. The respondents are at liberty to raise all the objections as regards the subject matter before the learned Arbitrator. 8. Registry to send a copy of this order to the learned arbitrator. (ARUN PALLI) CHIEF JUSTICE Jammu 07.11.2025 Abdul Qayoom, Secy. Abdul Qayoom Lone I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 12.11.2025 11:57