Arb.O.P (Com.Div.) No.548 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 10.06.2025 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE Arb.O.P (Com.Div.) No.548 of 2024 M/s.Sri Karupiah Trading Company, Represented by its Proprietor Mrs.K.Renuka Devi W/o.Mr.T.Kulanchiyappan 17/1, 1st Street, Alwarpet Teynampet, Chennai – 600 018. ...Petitioner vs. 1.The Annai Steels, Represented by its Partners, Mr.Rajesh, S/o.Janarthanam and Mrs.Kalaivani, W/o.Rajesh, S.No.315/1A1B, 318/4, Melveeeranam Road, Melveeranam Village, Vellore District – 632 505. 2.Mr.J.Rajesh 3.Mrs.Kalaivani 4.M/s.Theeran Steel, Represented by its Proprietor, Mr.S.Pandiyan, S/o.V.Subramanian, S.No.315/1A1B, 318/4, Melveeeranam Road, Melveeranam Village, 1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P (Com.Div.) No.548 of 2024 Vellore District – 632 505. 5.Mr.S.Pandiyan ... Respondents Prayer : Arbitration Original Petition (Commercial Division) filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying to, a) Appoint a sole arbitrator for settlement of the dispute with the petitioner and respondents of the company namely M/s.Sri Karupiah Trading Company, M/s.Annai Steel and M/s.Theeran Steel. b) To award the costs of the petitioner and c) and pass such further orders as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. For petitioner : M/s.L.Karthiga For Respondents : Set ex-parte ORDER This petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking for appointment of an Arbitrator by this Court. 2. As directed by this Court, Registry has printed the names of the respondents in the cause list today. Earlier, since the notice could not be 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P (Com.Div.) No.548 of 2024 served on the respondents through postal service, the petitioner was directed to effect Substituted Service by effecting Paper Publication both in English and Tamil daily newspaper having wide circulation in the State of Tamil Nadu. The petitioner had also effected Substituted Service as per the directions of this Court. An Affidavit of Service, enclosing the paper publication has also been filed. Till date, no one has entered appearance on behalf of the respondents. Hence, the respondents are set ex-parte by this Court. 3. There seems to be a dispute between the petitioner and the respondents arising out of the Memorandum of Understanding dated 15.12.2022. There exists an Arbitration Clause in the said Memorandum of Understanding and the same is extracted hereunder: “eLth; gphpt[:- ,e;j g[hpe;Jzh;t[ xg;ge;jj;jpy; ntW v';F tH';fg;gl;Ls;sij jtpw. ,Ujug;g[f;F ,ilapy; ,z';fkhd jPh;t[ vl;lglhtpl;lhy;. g[hpe;Jzh;t[ xg;ge;jj;jpd; kPwy;. Koj;jy;. bry;YgoahFk; my;yJ epiwntw;wg;gLjy; my;yJ me;je;j chpikfis Mfpatw;wpypUe;J ve;j xU rh;r;ir my;yJ ntWg;ghl;il bghWj;jtiu 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P (Com.Div.) No.548 of 2024 kw;Wk; ,Ujug;g[ bghUg;g[fs; my;yJ g[hpe;Jzh;t[ xg;ge;jj;jpy; ve;j xU tpyf;fKk; my;yJ ve;j tpjj;jpYk; g[hpe;Jzh;t[ xg;ge;jj;ij bjhLtJ gpd;dh; ,Ujug;gpy; vGJk; mwptpg;gpd; K:yk; mj;jifa rh;ir my;yJ ntWghl;ilf; Fwpg;gplyhk;. brd;id cah;ePjpkd;wk; K:yk; epakpf;fg;gl;l xU eLtupd; xnu eLth;. eLth; xU epahakhd tpUij epiwntw;Wthh;/ nkYk; eLthpd; tpUij ,Ujug;g[fs; kPJ ,WjpahdJ/ nkw;TwpathW eLth; kw;Wk; rkur rl;lk; 1996d; tpjpKiwfs; my;yJ rl;l Kiwahd khw;w';fs; my;yJ mjd; kWrPuikg;g[fs; kw;Wk; mjDld; bra;ag;gl;l tpjpfs; kw;Wk; eilKiwapy; ,Uf;Fk; fhyk; Mfpait ,e;j gphptpd; fPH; eLth; eltof;iffSf;F bghUe;Jk;. eLth; tpUJf;F Vw;g eLth; bryt[ Vw;gLk;/ 4. The petitioner has invoked Arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration Clause by issuing notice to the respondents on 15.03.2024 to comply with the requirements under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. A reply has been sent only by the second 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P (Com.Div.) No.548 of 2024 respondent, while the other respondents have not sent any reply. 5. Since there exists an Arbitration Clause in the Memorandum of Understanding, which is the subject matter of the dispute between the parties and since the petitioner has complied with the requirements under Section 21 by issuing notice to the respondents on 15.03.2024 and since there is no consensus between the parties with regard to the name of the Arbitrator, this Court has to necessarily appoint an Arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 6. For the foregoing reasons, this Arbitration Original Petition is allowed as prayed for by issuing the following directions :- a) This Court appoints Hon'ble Mr.Justice.M.Sathyanarayanan, Former Judge of Madras High Court, residing at 32(148), Flat No.7F9, 7th Floor, Bhaasyaam Plutus Residence, Lattice Bridge Road, Thiruvanmiyur, Chennai – 600 041, (Mobile Nos.9445443300, 9498022255) as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties arising out of the Memorandum of Understanding. (b) The Arbitrator shall be paid his/her remuneration / fees in accordance with the 4th schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P (Com.Div.) No.548 of 2024 (c) Both the parties shall equally share the arbitrator's fees. (d) The Arbitrator shall conduct the arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and shall complete the arbitration within the specified time as prescribed under the said Act. 10.06.2025 Index: Yes/ No Speaking order / Non speaking order Neutral citation : Yes / No kak 6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Arb.O.P (Com.Div.) No.548 of 2024 ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J. kak Arb.O.P (Com.Div.) No.548 of 2024 10.06.2025 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis