1 2025:HHC:15740 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. Arb. Case No. 746 of 20 24 a/w connected matters Decided on 23.05.2025 1. Arb. Case No.744 of 2024 Sai Eternal Foundation ......Applicant Versus NTPC Ltd. and another ...Respondents 2. Arb. Case No.745 of 2024 Sai Eternal Foundation ......Applicant Versus NTPC Ltd. and another ...Respondents 3. Arb. Case No.746 of 2024 Sai Eternal Foundation ......Applicant Versus NTPC Ltd. and another ...Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the applicant(s): Mr. Vikas Chauhan, Advocate, in all the cases. For the respondents: Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Pranjal Munjal, Advocate, for respondent No.1, in all the cases. G.S. Sandhawalia, Chief Justice (Oral) The application has been filed under Section 15 read with Section 14 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 1996, for substitution of the Arbitrator, in the present set of cases, wherein the claimant-applicant as well as respondent is also the same. 2. It is not disputed that initially in Arbitration Case No.2 of 2009, Mr. M.M. Khanna, Senior Advocate was appointed as a Single Arbitrator. 3. Before the Arbitrator could enter into the reference, the matter had been challenged before the Apex Court by the respondent and further proceedings were stayed on 04.12.2009 (Annexure A-3). Eventually the appeals were disposed of on 03.03.2020 while coming to the conclusion that there was no reason to interfere with the impugned common order. Resultantly, the present application has been filed and it has been explained that the passing of the said order came to the knowledge of the applicant only in the month of July 2020 and thereafter meetings were held for out of Court settlement, which have been referred to and appended as Annexure A-5 and resultantly further steps having not been initiated as such to settle the matters, present petitions have been filed. 4. In the reply filed, the factual matrix as such is disputed by the Corporation only on the ground that the petition 3 has been filed after one and a half years. Keeping in view the fact that there is an agreement as such between the parties and earlier also an Arbitrator had been appointed and due to which the matter had been challenged at the hands of the respondents and the process has got stalled for all these long years and therefore it would not lie in their mouth as such to submit that legitimate right of the petitioner has been cut short. 5. Accordingly, the application is allowed and a common Arbitrator, Mr. Varinder Sharma, District and Sessions Judge (Retd.), (Mobile No.9418327979), resident of A-24, Type-V Quarters, Officers Colony, Kasumpti, Shimla-9, is appointed as an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties, after his disclosure in writing is obtained in terms of Section 11(8) of the Act and only after receipt thereof, his appointment, as an Arbitrator, shall come into force. 6. On his giving consent to arbitrate the dispute between the parties as an Arbitrator, Mr. Varinder Sharma, District and Sessions Judge (Retd.), shall enter into reference, and shall pass an award in accordance with law. 7. Copy of this order be furnished to the learned counsel for the parties and also to the learned Arbitrator. The 4 learned Arbitrator so appointed shall be entitled to fee as per stipulation contained in 4th Schedule appended to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. May 23, 2025 ( G.S. Sandhawalia ) (ankit) Chief Justice