OD-21 ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE AP/111/2026 SARWAR HUSSAIN VS ANITA MALLIK BEFORE: The Hon’ble JUSTICE GAURANG KANTH Date : 14th July, 2026. Appearance: Mr. Ratul Das, Adv. Ms. Surasree Dawn, Adv. ...for the petitioner Mr. Amartya Basu, Adv. Mr. Aniket Gupta, Adv. ...for the respondent The Court:- The petitioner has preferred the present petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking the appointment of a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes and differences that have arisen out of and in connection with the Agreement for Sale dated 8 August 2025 executed between the petitioner and the respondent. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent had represented herself to be the sole and absolute owner of the premises being Premises No. 36, Dhiren Dhar Sarani, P.S. Muchipara, Kolkata, comprising a three-storied structure standing on land admeasuring 3 Cottahs 8 Chittacks 21 square feet. On the strength of such representation, the parties 2 entered into the registered Agreement for Sale dated 8th August 2025. It is the petitioner's case that, pursuant to the said agreement, the petitioner paid a sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- in cash on 22nd July 2025, and Rs. 8,00,000/- by way of Demand Draft No. 762669 dated 7th August 2025, aggregating Rs. 10,00,000/- as advance towards the sale consideration. In addition, the petitioner incurred expenditure of Rs. 10,36,608/- towards stamp duty and Rs. 600/- towards registration charges, both of which were accepted by the respondent without demur. According to the petitioner, despite repeated assurances and representations by the respondent, she failed to execute and register the deed of conveyance and to hand over peaceful, vacant possession of the scheduled property. The respondent repeatedly sought extensions on one pretext or another and ultimately failed to perform her obligations under the Agreement for Sale dated 8th August 2025. Learned Counsel for the petitioner further submits that a notice dated 18th April 2026 was issued calling upon the respondent to execute the deed of conveyance and hand over peaceful, vacant possession of the property. The said notice was delivered to the respondent on 20th April 2026. Subsequently, upon learning that the respondent was attempting to sell the subject property, the petitioner instituted proceedings under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by filing a petition before the learned City Civil Court at Calcutta, being Miscellaneous (Arbitration) Case No. 4351 of 2026. By an order dated 8th May 2026, the learned Judge, Bench-IV, City Civil Court, Calcutta granted an interim order restraining the respondent from selling, transferring, encumbering, and/or creating any third-party 3 right, title, or interest in respect of the subject property. The said interim protection continues to remain in force. The petitioner contends that Clause O of the Agreement for Sale contains an arbitration clause providing that all disputes and differences arising out of the said agreement shall be referred to arbitration at Kolkata. Invoking the said clause, the petitioner issued a notice under Section 21 of the Act dated 20th May 2026, proposing the name of Mr. Abhidipto Tarafder, Advocate, as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The respondent neither replied to the said notice nor concurred with the appointment of the proposed Arbitrator. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent does not dispute the existence of the Agreement for Sale dated 8th August 2025, or the arbitration clause contained therein. The parties have consented to the appointment of an Arbitrator. In view of the foregoing, Mr. Shaunak Mukhopadhyay, Advocate (Mob: 8981772268), is appointed as the sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The learned Sole Arbitrator shall enter upon reference in due compliance with Section 12(5) of the Act. The learned Sole Arbitrator shall fix his remuneration in terms of the Fourth Schedule to the Act. A copy of this order shall be communicated to the learned Sole Arbitrator for necessary steps. It is clarified that all questions relating to the arbitrability of the disputes, the admissibility of the claims, limitation, jurisdiction, and all 4 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.) S. A. AR (CR)