The High Court · 2025

Counsel for the Applicant : SRI MADANU ARESH Counsel for the Respondent: SRI B. ANIL The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI APARESH KUMAR SINGH ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.116 of 2025 ORDER: Heard Mr. M. Naresh, learned counsel for the appiicant and Mr. B. Anil, learned counsel for the respondenr.

2. By order dated 01.08.2025, this Court proposed to appoint a learned retired Judge Sri S.M. Rafee as an independent arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. The order dated 01.08.2025 is extracted hereunder for easv reference: "Mr. Madanu applicant. Naresh, learned counsel for the Mr. B.Anil, learned counsel for the respondent A Consultant Agreemenl was arrived at between the applicant and thc respondent on 21 .1 1.2018, which provided for a Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Clause 14, which reads as under: " 14. Dispute Resolution and Arbitratiotr Clause. Exccpt as ma-v be rcpugnant to law, both parties agree that anv <lispute arising out o[ this agreernent shal] be first attempted to be resoh,ed in a mutually acceptable manner by providing a cure period of 15 days to address the concerns of the respective partics, lf the dispute is not resolved by mutual conciliation, the dispute rvould be then relerred for arbitration under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The place of Arbitration shall be Hyderabad (1'elangana), India- Both parties agree and accept that the arbitral arvard in India can be binding in other countries, particularly rn USA and the State of New Hampshire (USA) in accordance \,ith the Nerv York Convention on Lhe Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Au,ards. 2 Both the parties agree to co enforcement of the arbitral awa of any petition for recognrtlon Award.' rate with the Party seeking rn lndia or USA, in suPPort enforcement of the Arbitral In respect of the dispu the parlies, theY also arri Statement of Account Billin under the Consultant Agr billing and payment recerPt crores. However, dispute re alleged material breaches Agreement and compliance Expertise and Work Deliver Propriety Rights led to lnvo clause No.14 bY the aPPI 15.02.2025 at Page 356. through letter dated 07 .O3 -2 would cooperate to amtca disputes to the extenL of breaches of the Consult respondent also informed incurred/paid/ exPended under the Consultant Agree of Marketing OPerational S on 79.07.2023 without Pre ascertain denial of anY writi be liable for the alleged amo with liquidated damage s an legal expenses and inter applicant. ResPondent eithe r partY, agreed to respecl of comPliance of Cla agreed to thc legal noti invocation of the arbitratio to either parties. However, could not be able to arrive a of the Arbitrator. Therefo jurisdiction of this Court u Arbitrat ion and Conciliation es which arose between ed at a Consolidated and Payment ReceiPt ement quantifYing the to the tune of Rs.25 ating to rectification of under the Consultant of certain clauses like les, ConfidentialitY and ation of the arbitration ant uide notice dated --.- he respondent rePlied 25 and indicated that it Iy resolve the Pending the alleged rectihable nt Agreement. The at it acknowledges the ount of Rs.25 crores ent towards develoPment pport System (MOSS) as udice to his rights and gs by him He denied to nt of Rs.25 crores along non-liquidated damages, st as claimed bY the o, without Prejudice to legal notice demand in ses 4, 7 and 12. lt also e demand relating to clause without Prejudice appears that the Parties a consensus on the name , applicant invoked the der Section 1 1 (6) of the ct, 1996. When the matter ha counter afhdavit has been we11. been taken uP today, a led by the resPondent as "'/ 3 Learned counsel for thc respondent submits that it is agreeable to the appointment of a learned Retired ,Judge Sri S.M.Rafee i,vho is also a norrrinated Arbitrator in respect of other pending disputes between the parties. Learned counsel lor the applicant also filed Memo dated 17 .O7 .2025 containing the consent appointmenl of mututrlly acceptable Arbitraror above. a 1n S Learned counsel lor the parties, therefore, submit that the proposed Arbitrator may be appointed to adjudicate the dispute betu,een the parties. ln r.ieq'of the afor-esaid facts and circums[ances and the consensus arrrved at betq,een the parries on the proposecl Arbitrator, I hcreby propose to appoint the learned Retired Jlrdge Sri S.M.Rafee (presentlv rcsidir-rg at Flat No.103, D.S.R.Rcganti Mind Space, Madhapur, Hyderabad, Telangana-500081, Mobile No.91 9866096076) as an independent Arbitrator to acljudicate the dispute between the parties. The proposed Arbitrator is requested to submit a declaration in terms of his consent and a declaration in terms of Se ction 12( 1) read with Schcdule VI of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Registry is directed to communicate this order to the proposed Arbi Lrartor. Thc ma[ter be listed after two weeks u'irh the response, if an1', of thc ltroposcd Arbitrator."

3. The proposed arbitrator has submitted his consent along with a declaration under Section 12 ( 1) read with ! Schedule VI of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by letter dated I I.O8.2025. 4

4. Learned counsel for the arties therefore submit that appointment of the proposed ar itrator may be confirmed.

5. In that view of the atter, I hereby appoint Sri S.M.Rafee, a retired Judge (presently residing at Fiat No.103, D.S.R.Reganti Mind Sp , Madhapur, Hyderabad, Telangana-500081, Mobile No.9 9866096076) to act as an independent arbitrator in respe of the dispute between the partles.

6. Registry is directed to se a Xerox copy of the entire pleadings to the learned arbitra r. The learned arbitrator is requested to keep in mind the e prescribed in Scheduie IV of the Act and the time limit pre cribed under Section 29A of the Act 7 . The arbitration application s accordingly disposed of. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. To //TRUE CO Yil D/- B.SATYAVATHI JOINT REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER

1. Sri S.M. Rafee, District and Sessions J Resan M n S ace M ad a p u r H yd d p e No o I Bot)096 76 0 S a nd ma e r a pa rSp 2. The S.O. O.S. Section, High Court for B Spec a M v h ) 1 t Re d R/o e s ( F ) bad Te a n oana 5 nger) ( along with a copy of affidavit 03 D S R Mo le b N o 0I I t 00 1 State of Telangana at Hyderabad --::-.a*:aertat a--- i-

3. One CC to SRI MADANU NARESH, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to SRl. B. ANIL, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies kul/gh W. HIGH COURT DATED:14l08/2025 / ORDER ARBITRATION APPLICATION No.116 of 2025 ..-rTAiI 1\ I () + , I DISPOSING OF THE ARBITRATION APPLICATION $