Sr. No.01 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR (Through Virtual Mode) Arb P No.52/2025 Fayaz Ahmad Sofi and others. …Petitioner. Through: Mr. Sameer ul Hameed, Advocate. Vs. Mohammad Muzaffar Sofi ….Respondent(s) Through: Mr. Hasnain M. Khawaja, Advocate. CORAM: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE O R D E R 30.01.2026 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 parties to the petition are stated to be the legal heirs of Late Ghulam Mohammad Sofi and the properties, in the shape of houses and shops situate at Koker Bazar, Srinagar, left behind by predecessor in interest of the parties, are joint and un-partitioned. It is stated that in order to partition the joint properties as also to settle the disputes between the parties with regard to M/s S. M. Traders, an agreement dated 03.06.2024 was executed between the parties, vide which Mr. Mufti Nasir ul Islam, was appointed as an arbitrator. Accordingly, the arbitrator passed the award on 07.01.2025. Which, however, was challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, before the Court of Additional District Judge, Srinagar, by the respondent. And was set aside in terms of order dated 24.11.2025. It is further stated that during the pendency of petition under Section 34, Arb. Pet. No.19/2025 under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act was filed by the respondent, seeking appointment of an arbitrator for adjudication of disputes with regard to M/s S. M. Traders only. The said petition was allowed vide order dated 28.11.2025 and Mr. M. Y. Akhoon, Retired District and Sessions Judge, was appointed as arbitrator. 3. It is contended that parties had agreed for reference of the disputes as regard their ancestral properties as also the business concern (M/s S. M. Traders), however, in terms of the order dated 28.11.2025 passed in Arb P No.19/2025, the dispute qua M/s S. M. Traders, alone was referred to the arbitrator. The petitioners, therefore, seek reference of the dispute even with regard to the ancestral properties to the arbitrator. It is urged that since the dispute as regards M/s S. M. Traders, has already been referred to Mr. M. Y. Akhoon, Retd. District & Sessions Judge, it would be expedient if the present dispute concerning ancestral properties be also referred to the same arbitrator. 4. The respondent who is on caveat, is represented by Mr. Hasnain M. Khawaja, Advocate. He accepts notice on behalf of the respondent and, as always, fairly submits that let Mr. M. Y. Akhoon, Retd. District & Sessions Judge, may be appointed as an arbitrator in the present petition also. However, he prays that respondent be granted liberty to raise all possible pleas/ objections before the arbitral tribunal/ arbitrator. 5. 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. M. Y. Akhoon, Retired District & Sessions Judge, 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 respondent is at liberty to raise all the objections as regards the subject matter before the learned Arbitrator. 6. Registry to send a copy of this order to the learned arbitrator. (ARUN PALLI) CHIEF JUSTICE Jammu 30.01.2026 Abdul Qayoom, Secy. Abdul Qayoom Lone I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 31.01.2026 16:59