ARB.P./219/2022 of VIJAY KUMAR MISHRA CONSTRUCTION PVT.LTD. THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR VIJAY KUMAR MISHRA Vs THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

$~1*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ARB.P. 219/2022VIJAY KUMAR MISHRA CONSTRUCTION PVT.LTD.THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR VIJAY KUMAR MISHRA*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ARB.P. 219/2022VIJAY KUMAR MISHRA CONSTRUCTION PVT.LTD.THROUGH ITS DIRECTOR VIJAY KUMAR MISHRA

..... Petitioner

Through:Mr. Rahul Sharma, Mr. Ayush Bhatia,Advs.

versus

THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.

..... Respondent

Through:Mr. Amandeep Singh, Adv.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGHO R R

%20.02.2024

1.This is petition seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate thedisputes between the parties arising out of an All Risk (CAR) Policybearing No. 152700/44/2020/8.

2.The policy has not been filed, however, the arbitration Clause isreproduced and reads as under:-

“13.If any dispute or difference shall arise as to thequantum to be paid under this policy (liability being otherwiseadmitted) such difference shall independently of all otherquestions be referred to the decision of sole arbitrator to beappointed in writing by the parties to or if they cannot agreeupon single arbitrator within 30 days of any party invokingarbitration, the same shall be referred to panel of threearbitrators, comprising of two arbitrators, one to be appointed

by each of the parties to the dispute / difference and the thirdarbitrator to be appointed by such two arbitrators andarbitration shall be conducted under and in accordance withthe provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.”

3.Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner states that the onlyobjection raised by the respondent is with regard to the territorialjurisdiction. He states that the respondent has its registered office andhead office at Delhi and hence, this Court would have territorialjurisdiction to entertain and try the present petition.objection raised by the respondent is with regard to the territorialjurisdiction. He states that the respondent has its registered office andhead office at Delhi and hence, this Court would have territorialjurisdiction to entertain and try the present petition.

4.Mr. Singh, learned counsel appears for the respondent and states that inthe present case, the cause of action has arisen in Satna, MadhyaPradesh. The respondent has its office at Satna, Madhya Pradesh. Thepolicy was issued from Satna, Madhya Pradesh and the incident leadingto the claim also occurred in Madhya Pradesh. Hence, it is stated thatthis Court would have no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the presentpetition.the present case, the cause of action has arisen in Satna, MadhyaPradesh. The respondent has its office at Satna, Madhya Pradesh. Thepolicy was issued from Satna, Madhya Pradesh and the incident leadingto the claim also occurred in Madhya Pradesh. Hence, it is stated thatthis Court would have no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the presentpetition.

5.I have heard learned counsel for the parties.

6.Admittedly, there is no seat of arbitration or exclusive jurisdictionClause in the policy. Hence, this Court has to rely on the provisions ofSection 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read withSections 16 to 20 of CPC.Clause in the policy. Hence, this Court has to rely on the provisions ofSection 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read withSections 16 to 20 of CPC.

7.The important aspect of the said matter is that the petitioner itselfinvoked the arbitration Clause vide legal notice dated 08.12.2020. Thesaid notice is addressed to Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., DivisionalOffice, City Trade Centre, Chorasia Complex, Samaria Chowk, Nearinvoked the arbitration Clause vide legal notice dated 08.12.2020. Thesaid notice is addressed to Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., DivisionalOffice, City Trade Centre, Chorasia Complex, Samaria Chowk, Near

Bus Stand, Satna-485001.

8.The petitioner itself has initiated the arbitration process at Satna,Madhya Pradesh vide notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration andConciliationAct,1996,hence,itis clear that thearbitrationproceedings have commenced at Madhya Pradesh.Madhya Pradesh vide notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration andConciliationAct,1996,hence,itis clear that thearbitrationproceedings have commenced at Madhya Pradesh.

9.My attention has been drawn to the judgment of Hon’ble SupremeCourt in Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd. v. Sanjay Dalia(2015) 10 SCC 161 and more particularly paragraph 15 which reads asunder:-

“15. The learned author Mulla in Code of Civil Procedure, 18thEdn., has observed that under clauses (a) to (c) of Section 20, theplaintiff has choice of forum to institute suit. The intendmentof the Explanation to Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedureis that once the corporation has subordinate office in the placewhere the cause of action arises wholly or in part, it cannot beheard to say that it cannot be sued there because it did not carryon business at that place. The linking of the place with the causeof action in the Explanation where subordinate office of thecorporation is situated is reflective of the intention of thelegislature and such place has to be the place of the filing ofthe suit and not the principal place of business. Ordinarily thesuit has to be filed at the place where there is principal place ofbusiness of the corporation.”

10. In the present case as well, the subordinate office of the respondent issituated at Satna, Madhya Pradesh and for the said reason, the State ofsituated at Satna, Madhya Pradesh and for the said reason, the State of

Madhya Pradesh will have the jurisdiction to entertain and try thepresent petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and ConciliationAct, 1996.

11. For the said reasons, the petition is dismissed, granting the liberty to thepetitioner to invoke the jurisdiction of the State of Madhya Pradesh. Allother issues raised by the parties are left open.petitioner to invoke the jurisdiction of the State of Madhya Pradesh. Allother issues raised by the parties are left open.

12. Pending applications, if any, are hereby disposed of.

FEBRUARY 20, 2024 / (MS)

JASMEET SINGH, J

Click here to check corrigendum, if any