ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 — Ss. 11(5) & 11(6) — Development Agreement-cum-GPA — arbitration clause providing two arbitrators and an umpire — invocation admitted — appointment of independent arbitrator by Court. Where arbitration clause contemplated each party nominating its arbitrator and common umpire to be appointed upon disagreement, and respondents did not dispute invocation or existence of arbitration clause, Court held that disputes must be adjudicated through arbitration and a neutral arbitrator was required to be appointed — application under Section 11 allowed — former Judge appointed as sole arbitrator. (Paras 2–5).

ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 — Ss. 11(5) & 11(6) — Development Agreement-cum-GPA — arbitration clause providing two arbitrators and an umpire — invocation admitted — appointment of independent arbitrator by Court.
Where arbitration clause contemplated each party nominating its arbitrator and common umpire to be appointed upon disagreement, and respondents did not dispute invocation or existence of arbitration clause, Court held that disputes must be adjudicated through arbitration and a neutral arbitrator was required to be appointed — application under Section 11 allowed — former Judge appointed as sole arbitrator.
(Paras 2–5).

ARBITRATION — agreement of parties on reference and neutral adjudication — Court exercise under Section 11 not contested.
Respondents’ counsel conceded arbitration clause and agreed to appointment of independent arbitrator — Court held reference unavoidable and appointed former Judge to adjudicate disputes.
(Paras 3–4).

ARBITRATION — directions to arbitrator — liberty to file claims and counter-claims — entitlement to fee under Schedule IV.
Court directed arbitrator to enter reference, render award within statutory period, gave parties liberty to submit detailed claims/counter-claims, and recorded arbitrator’s entitlement to fee under Schedule IV.
(Para 5; Order portion).

PARA-WISE SYNOPSIS / ANALYSIS OF FACTS AND LAW 

Para 1: Application under Section 11

Court states application filed under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking reference of disputes arising out of registered Development Agreement-cum-GPA dated 16-12-2019 to an independent arbitrator.

Para 2: Arbitration Clause

Court reproduces verbatim Clause 18 of Development Agreement-cum-GPA, providing for:

• Each party to choose one arbitrator.

• In event of disagreement, arbitrators to nominate a common umpire.

• Award to be final and binding.

• Relevant provisions of Arbitration Act applicable.

Court notes this clause forms legal foundation for reference.

Para 3: Invocation of Arbitration

Court records disputes arose and applicants served arbitration notice dated 27-09-2024; receipt not denied by respondents.

Para 4: Respondents’ Position

Court records learned counsel for respondents does not dispute:

• existence of arbitration clause,

• fact that disputes arose,

• need for adjudication through arbitration,
  and agrees to appointment of independent arbitrator.

Para 5: Appointment by Court

Court allows arbitration application.
Court appoints Hon’ble Justice A.V. Sesha Sai (Former Judge, High Court of Andhra Pradesh) as Arbitrator, directing him:

• to enter upon reference,

• adjudicate disputes arising out of DAGPA dated 16-12-2019,

• render award within statutory period.

Court also records:

• parties free to file detailed claims and counter-claims,

• arbitrator entitled to fee under Schedule IV of Act,

• no order as to costs,

• pending miscellaneous applications stand closed.

FINAL LEGAL ANALYSIS 

The decision is procedural, grounded on the limited mandate of Section 11.
The Court does not examine whether claims are meritorious; it simply confirms:

1. Existence of arbitration agreement — acknowledged.

2. Dispute invocation communicated — not denied.

3. Respondents concede reference and neutral adjudication — thereby reinforcing arbitrability.

With consent on both sides that disputes require arbitration, the Court exercises Section 11 jurisdiction to ensure neutral adjudication through appointment of a former Judge.
The clause envisaging party-appointed arbitrators is bypassed in favour of appointment of a sole independent arbitrator, reflecting modern judicial trend toward neutrality and efficiency.