M S Ae Infraprojects Private Limited Through Its Director Mr Mukesh Nathalal Barot vs. Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation Through Its Municipal Commissioner

Facts

M S AE Infraprojects Private Limited, through its Director Mukesh Nathalal Barot, filed an Arbitration Petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petition was filed against the Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation and others. The parties jointly submitted that they had no objection to proceeding to arbitration for all disputes and differences. The petitioner requested that the arbitrator be conversant with Goods and Services Tax (GST) law and regulations. The respondent preferred a retired High Court judge as the arbitrator. The Court considered these submissions.

Held

The Court decided to appoint a sole arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of and in connection with the Agreement. The Court appointed Justice (Retd.) Manoj Sanklecha, a Former Judge of the High Court, as the Sole Arbitrator. The Court directed that a copy of the order be communicated to the Arbitrator by the Petitioner's advocates within one week, and the Petitioner would provide contact particulars to the Arbitral Tribunal. The Arbitrator was requested to forward the statutory Statement of Disclosure under Section 11(8) read with Section 12(1) of the Act within two weeks of receiving the order. Parties were directed to appear before the Arbitrator for directions regarding the arbitration proceedings. All arbitral costs and fees were to be borne equally by the parties in the first instance, subject to the final award. The Court expressly stated that nothing in the order was an expression of opinion on the merits of the matter, and all issues on merits were kept open to be agitated before the arbitral tribunal.

Key Issues

1. Whether an arbitrator should be appointed to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the parties arising out of and in connection with the Agreement, and if so, what should be the qualifications of such an arbitrator? The Petitioner argued that the arbitrator must be conversant with the law and regulations governing Goods and Services Tax (GST). The Respondent argued that they would prefer a retired judge of a High Court to be the arbitrator. The Court had to decide on the appointment of an arbitrator and consider the parties' preferences regarding the arbitrator's qualifications and background.