JUDGMENT : Ritu Bahri, C.J. In the present case, as per the terms of contract agreement (Annexure-2), Article 26 is the clause for dispute resolution. Clause 26.3 of said contract agreement deals with appointment of an Arbitrator. 2. At the outset, counsels for the parties point out that earlier this Court appointed Mr. Justice P.C. Pant (Retd. Judge Supreme Court to act as a sole arbitrator to adjudicate all disputes, claims and counter-claims between the parties arising out of their contract agreement, but he expressed his inability to conduct arbitration proceedings due to personal reasons. Learned counsels state that in the aforesaid light, they have no objection to appointment of an independent Arbitrator by this Court. 3. Counsel for the respondents states that since the amount in dispute is more than three crores, as per clause 11.2 of the Arbitration Rules of the Society for Affordable Redressal of Disputes, if the claim amount is more than three crores, a tribunal shall be constituted of odd number of Arbitrators to be nominated by the parties. 4. Counsel for the applicant / petitioner is not disputing the above said provision contained in the Arbitration Rule of the Society for Affordable Redressal of Disputes. 5. Keeping in view this fact, the Court proceed to appoint a panel of three Arbitrators. 6. Counsel for the applicant / petitioner proposed the name of Mr. Justice B.S. Verma, (Retd. Judge, High Court of Uttarakhand, to act as an Arbitrator on its behalf, and counsel for the respondents proposed the name of Mr. Justice V.K. Bist, (Retd. Chief Justice, Sikkim High Court, to act as an Arbitrator on its behalf. This Court has no hesitation in accepting the names of the two Arbitrators as proposed by the parties. However, the third Arbitrator has to be appointed by mutual understanding / consensus of both the nominated arbitrators in order to adjudicate the disputes which have arisen between the parties under the aforesaid contract agreement. 7. The Arbitration Application is, accordingly, allowed.