Party Can Waive Arbitrator's Ineligibility U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act By Express Agreement In Writing: Bombay High Court
4 months, 1 week ago

Party Can Waive Arbitrator's Ineligibility U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act By Express Agreement In Writing: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Rajesh S. Patil affirmed that once an ineligibility to act as Arbitrator is waived by an express agreement in writing under proviso to section 12 of the Arbitration Act, waiving party is prohibited from claiming ineligibility of the Arbitrator for the first time under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts The present petition is filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by the original claimant seeking to quash and set aside the arbitral award dated 4th February 2022, passed by the sole arbitrator. Court's Analysis The court, at the outset, noted that in the present proceedings, the petitioner/claimant invoked the arbitration clause by its letter dated 7th December 2020 and at the time of invocation itself the claimant themselves have referred to Clause 64 of the contract which provided that “the Arbitral Tribunal shall consist of a Sole Arbitrator who shall be a Gazetted Officer of Railway not below JA Grade, nominated by the General Manager”. The said letter of the respondent dated 18th December 2020 mentioned that if there is an invocation of the Arbitration clause, the claimant should first waive the condition of applicability of sub-section of Section 12. The court relied on the Supreme Court judgment in HRD Corporation Vs. Gail Limited, 2017 wherein it was held that if the arbitrator fails to file disclosure in terms of section 12 read with Fifth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the remedy of the party in that event would be to apply under section 14 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to the court to decide about the termination of the mandate of the arbitral tribunal on that ground.

Arbitration Railways Court Party Waiver Act Letter Bombay High Dated Petitioner Arbitrator Arbitral Sole Arbitrator Waive Section 12 Section 34 Of Section 13 Claimant Express Agreement  letter  arbitrator  claimant  writing  petitioner  railways  express  dated  arbitral  arbitrators  waive  court  ineligibility  arbitration  party  bombay  high  act

History of this topic

Award Cannot Be Set Aside When No Objections Were Raised Before Arbitrator Or Court U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
1 month, 1 week ago

Award Cannot Be Set Aside When No Objections Were Raised Before Arbitrator Or Court U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul held that the award cannot be set aside solely on the ground that the appointment of the Arbitrator was illegal in view of section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act when no such objections were raised before the Arbitrator or the court under section 34 of …

Notice To Appoint Another Arbitrator To Continue Arbitration Proceedings Satisfies Mandate Of S.21Of A&C Act: Kerala High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Notice To Appoint Another Arbitrator To Continue Arbitration Proceedings Satisfies Mandate Of S.21Of A&C Act: Kerala High Court

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court bench of Justice Syam Kumar V.M., while hearing a Section 11 petition, has held that a notice to revive a stalled arbitration proceedings by appointing another arbitrator satisfies the mandate of Section 21 of the A&C Act. The court further observed that the dispute between parties arose in 2018, which is evident from the filing of …

Court Cannot Assume Jurisdiction To Appoint Arbitrator Unless Request For Reference Of Dispute Is Received By Respondent: Bombay High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Court Cannot Assume Jurisdiction To Appoint Arbitrator Unless Request For Reference Of Dispute Is Received By Respondent: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice R. M. Joshi has held that compliance with Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is mandatory and that the court cannot assume jurisdiction to appoint an Arbitrator under Section 11 unless a request for a reference of dispute is received by the respondent. The present application was filed under Section …

Violation Of Provisions Of Arbitration Act Or MSMED Act Can Be Adjudicated By Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Orissa High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Violation Of Provisions Of Arbitration Act Or MSMED Act Can Be Adjudicated By Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Orissa High Court

Live Law  

An Orissa High Court bench of Justice K.R. Mohapatra has dismissed a writ petition upon holding that the petitioner, without availing the efficacious statutory remedy u/s 34 of the Arbitration Act had approached the Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for which the Court was not inclined to exercise its discretionary power to entertain it. Additionally, the …

S.12(5) Of A&C Act Provides For Agreement In Writing, Novation Can't Be Allowed Only Because Of Appointment Of Arbitrator At First Instance: Patna HC
2 months, 3 weeks ago

S.12(5) Of A&C Act Provides For Agreement In Writing, Novation Can't Be Allowed Only Because Of Appointment Of Arbitrator At First Instance: Patna HC

Live Law  

The Patna High Court Bench of Chief Justice K. Vinod Chandran has held that the proviso to Section 12 specifically provided for a waiver by an express agreement in writing. When the statute provides for an express agreement in writing there can be no novation of the agreement found, by reason only of the appointment of an Arbitrator at the …

Award Passed By Ineligible Arbitrator Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Jammu And Kashmir HC
2 months, 3 weeks ago

Award Passed By Ineligible Arbitrator Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Jammu And Kashmir HC

Live Law  

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar has held that award passed by an ineligible arbitrator is liable to be set aside under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Observations: The court after referring to section 34 of the Arbitration Act observed that “an application for setting aside of award passed by an Arbitral …

Appointment Of Managing Director/Chairman Of Party As Arbitrator Is Prohibited U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: J&K High Court
3 months, 1 week ago

Appointment Of Managing Director/Chairman Of Party As Arbitrator Is Prohibited U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: J&K High Court

Live Law  

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan has held that managing director or chairman of a party to the arbitration agreement cannot be appointed as Arbitrator in light of section 12 read with Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration Act. The petitioner submitted that the appointment of Managing Director/Chairman of the respondent as Arbitrator …

Once Person Empowered To Nominate Arbitrator Becomes Ineligible U/S 12(5), Matter Shall Not Be Referred To Arbitration: Patna High Court
3 months, 1 week ago

Once Person Empowered To Nominate Arbitrator Becomes Ineligible U/S 12(5), Matter Shall Not Be Referred To Arbitration: Patna High Court

Live Law  

The Patna High Court bench of Chief Justice K Vinod Chandran has held that once the person empowered to nominate an arbitrator under an arbitration clause becomes ineligible to nominate the arbitrator, the matter shall not referred to the Arbitration. On the other hand it is the case of the respondent that the Patna High Court in State of Bihar …

Petition U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Entertained After Lapse Of 3 Yrs From Date Of Cause Of Action Arising: J&K High Court
3 months, 1 week ago

Petition U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Entertained After Lapse Of 3 Yrs From Date Of Cause Of Action Arising: J&K High Court

Live Law  

The Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court bench of Justice Tashi Rabstan has held that the petition under section 11 of the Arbitration Act cannot be entertained after lapse of 3 years from the date of cause of action having arisen. In the present case, the cause of action to file the petition under Section 11 of the Act, …

[Arbitration Act] S.2(1)(f) Is Non-Derogable, Applicability Cannot Be Excluded Even By Mutual Consent Of Parties: Delhi High Court
3 months, 2 weeks ago

[Arbitration Act] S.2(1)(f) Is Non-Derogable, Applicability Cannot Be Excluded Even By Mutual Consent Of Parties: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna has held that section 2 of the Arbitration Act which defined the International Commercial Arbitration is a non derogable provision and its applicability cannot be excluded even by mutual consent of the parties. However, certain Sections of the Act, like S.2 which is the definition section, form the basic structure …

Ineligibility Of Arbitrator Cannot Be Challenged First Time Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court
3 months, 2 weeks ago

Ineligibility Of Arbitrator Cannot Be Challenged First Time Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court

Live Law  

The Madras High Court bench of of Chief justice Mr. K.R.Shriram and Justice Senthil Kumar Ramamoorthy has held that the ineligibility of the Arbitrator cannot be challenged for the first time under section 34 of the Arbitration Act when there were enough opportunities to challenge the same in the earlier proceedings. Later when the award was against the respondents, they …

Two Arbitration Petitions For Same Relief Cannot Be Filed: Chhattisgarh High Court
3 months, 2 weeks ago

Two Arbitration Petitions For Same Relief Cannot Be Filed: Chhattisgarh High Court

Live Law  

The Chhattisgarh High Court bench of Chief Justice Mr. Ramesh Sinha has held that two arbitration petitions for the same relief cannot be filed. The members of the applicant Society are the lessees of the respondent, a registered private Company and all the individual members have entered into lease agreement for transfer of individual shop. It also submitted that despite …

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 18 - November 24, 2024
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 18 - November 24, 2024

Live Law  

Nominal Index: Presentation Convent Senior Secondary School Vs Satvinder Singh 2024 LiveLaw 311 Joginder Singh Vs State & Ors 2024 LiveLaw 312 M/s Mir Associates Construction Company Vs. Superintending Engineer Hydraulic Circle Doda and Anr 2024 LiveLaw 313 M/s Pardeep Electricals and Building Pvt. Vs. Union of India and Ors 2024 LiveLaw 314 Mohd Azam Vs UT Of J&K 2024 …

Whether Claim Is Barred By Res Judicata Cannot Be Decided By Court At S.11 Stage Of Arbitration Act: P&H High Court
4 months ago

Whether Claim Is Barred By Res Judicata Cannot Be Decided By Court At S.11 Stage Of Arbitration Act: P&H High Court

Live Law  

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench of Justice Survir Sehgal affirmed that the question whether a claim is barred by res judicata, does not arise for consideration in a proceedings under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act. That the petitioner had two remedies and having chosen to avail the remedy under Real Estate Act, 1996, he was debarred from …

Petition U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Is Maintainable If Statutory Remedy Before Invoking Arbitration Clause Is Exhausted: J&K And Ladakh HC
4 months ago

Petition U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Is Maintainable If Statutory Remedy Before Invoking Arbitration Clause Is Exhausted: J&K And Ladakh HC

Live Law  

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan has held that once the statutory remedy under contract is exhausted, arbitration clause can be invoked and appointment of the arbitrator can be sought under section 11 of the Arbitration Act.In this case, the respondent had to constitute Dispute resolution Board within 30 days after execution …

Fresh Arbitrator Can Be Appointed By Court U/S 14 Of Arbitration Act If Proposed Arbitrator Is Ineligible U/S 12(5): J&K And Ladakh HC
4 months ago

Fresh Arbitrator Can Be Appointed By Court U/S 14 Of Arbitration Act If Proposed Arbitrator Is Ineligible U/S 12(5): J&K And Ladakh HC

Live Law  

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan affirmed that when the arbitration clause is found to be foul with the amended section 12 of the Arbitration Act, the appointment of the arbitrator would be beyond the pale of the arbitration agreement. Brief Facts The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under …

Objections On Capacity Of Party To Initiate Arbitration Must Be Addressed Before Tribunal, Not While Appointing Arbitrator: Delhi HC
Trending News
4 months ago

Objections On Capacity Of Party To Initiate Arbitration Must Be Addressed Before Tribunal, Not While Appointing Arbitrator: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that the objections as regards the capacity of the party to initiate arbitration is an aspect which is necessarily required to be gone into the arbitration proceedings, however, the same could not preclude the constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal. The court held that a party may raise appropriate jurisdictional/preliminary …

Pre-Requirement Of Conciliation Before Invoking Arbitration Can't Prevent Filing Of Application U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
4 months ago

Pre-Requirement Of Conciliation Before Invoking Arbitration Can't Prevent Filing Of Application U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that pre requirement of conciliation in an arbitration clause before invoking the arbitration cannot be a bar to file an application under section 11 of the Arbitration Act seeking appointment of an Arbitrator. That disputes have arisen between the parties regarding payment of dues.,the Petitioner herein invoked Clause 17.7 …

De-Jure Ineligibility To Act As Arbitrator U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act Can Be Waived Only By Express Agreement In Writing: Delhi High Court
Trending News
4 months, 1 week ago

De-Jure Ineligibility To Act As Arbitrator U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act Can Be Waived Only By Express Agreement In Writing: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta affirmed that de jure ineligibility to act as an arbitrator can only be waived, after dispute having arisen, by the parties by an express agreement in writing under proviso to section 12 of the Arbitration Act. The court referred to the Delhi High Court judgment in Reliance Infrastructure Limited v. Madhyanchal …

Plea Of Limitation Shall Be Deemed To Be Waived If Not Raised Before Arbitrator U/S 16 Of Arbitration Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court
4 months, 1 week ago

Plea Of Limitation Shall Be Deemed To Be Waived If Not Raised Before Arbitrator U/S 16 Of Arbitration Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court

Live Law  

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar affirmed that plea of limitation cannot be allowed to be raised first time under section 34 of the Arbitration Act if no such plea was taken before the Arbitrator under section 16 of the Act. Brief Facts This arbitration appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 …

Arbitration Monthly Digest: October 2024
4 months, 1 week ago

Arbitration Monthly Digest: October 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Title: R.P. Case Title: LAVA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Vs MINTELLECTUALS LLP Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 1114 The Delhi High Court bench comprising Justice Prateek Jalan has held that in orders passed by the arbitral tribunal under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court is not bound by the principles underlying Order XXXVIII and XXXIX of …

Objection To Tribunal's Jurisdiction U/S 16 Of Arbitration Act Must Be Raised Before Or At Time Of Statement Of Defence: Himachal Pradesh HC
4 months, 2 weeks ago

Objection To Tribunal's Jurisdiction U/S 16 Of Arbitration Act Must Be Raised Before Or At Time Of Statement Of Defence: Himachal Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua affirmed that a party is bound by virtue of Section 16 of the Arbitration Act to raise any objection it may have to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal before or at the time of submission of its statement of defence, and at any time thereafter it is expressly prohibited. …

Appointment Of Arbitrator In Violation Of S. 12(5) Of A&C Act Is Void, Waiver Of This Provision Requires Explicit Written Agreement: Kerala High Court
10 months, 3 weeks ago

Appointment Of Arbitrator In Violation Of S. 12(5) Of A&C Act Is Void, Waiver Of This Provision Requires Explicit Written Agreement: Kerala High Court

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court single bench of Justice G. Girish held that the exemption provided for under the proviso of Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act applies only in cases where there is a waiver explicitly agreed upon in writing by the parties involved. Feeling aggrieved, the Petitioner approached the Kerala High Court under Section 14 read with …

Arbitration Act | When Parties Engage In Constant Communication, Unjust To Dismiss Claim Solely On Grounds Of Being Time-Barred: Calcutta High Court
11 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Act | When Parties Engage In Constant Communication, Unjust To Dismiss Claim Solely On Grounds Of Being Time-Barred: Calcutta High Court

Live Law  

The Calcutta High Court single bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya held that it would be an unnatural construction of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 where a party with a bona fide and a genuine claim is left in the lurch on the defence of the claim being barred by limitation. Brief Facts: The Petitioner approached the …

Technical Difficulties Shouldn't Thwart Objectives Of Arbitral Proceeding: Bombay High Court Allows Petition For Replacement Of Arbitrator
11 months, 3 weeks ago

Technical Difficulties Shouldn't Thwart Objectives Of Arbitral Proceeding: Bombay High Court Allows Petition For Replacement Of Arbitrator

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court single bench of Justice Bharti Dangre held although there might be an impression that with the legal termination of the arbitral tribunal's mandate upon the expiration of one year from the reference entry, as per Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 there might be a technical difficulty. Brief Facts: The Petitioner approached the …

Even If Arbitral Award Set Aside For Non-Compliance With Section 12, Parties Can File Fresh Section 11 Application For Arbitrator Appointment: Delhi High Court
1 year ago

Even If Arbitral Award Set Aside For Non-Compliance With Section 12, Parties Can File Fresh Section 11 Application For Arbitrator Appointment: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held that mere invalidation or unenforceability of the arbitrator appointment process does not render the entire arbitration clause void. The bench held that even if an arbitration award is set aside due to unilateral appointment and non-compliance with Section 12 of the Arbitration Act, fundamental agreement between the parties …

Application Under Section 29(A) A&C Act Doesn't Constitute Express Waiver In Writing U/s 12(5) To Challenge Arbitrator's Ineligibility: Delhi High Court
1 year ago

Application Under Section 29(A) A&C Act Doesn't Constitute Express Waiver In Writing U/s 12(5) To Challenge Arbitrator's Ineligibility: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri held that filing of the Section 29 application by a party did not amount to a waiver of its right to challenge the arbitrator's ineligibility under Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The bench held that filing an application under Section 29A of the Arbitration Act …

No Need For Notice To Invoke Fresh Arbitration Where Analogous Arbitral Proceedings Going: Delhi High Court Allows Section 11(6) Petition
1 year ago

No Need For Notice To Invoke Fresh Arbitration Where Analogous Arbitral Proceedings Going: Delhi High Court Allows Section 11(6) Petition

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri held that in cases where there are analogous arbitration proceedings related to other agreements, there is no need to invoke fresh arbitration by issuing a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act. The Petitioner approached the Delhi High Court and filed a petition under Section 11 of the …

Arbitrators Can't Unilaterally Modify Fee, Needs Parties' Consent: Bombay High Court
1 year, 1 month ago

Arbitrators Can't Unilaterally Modify Fee, Needs Parties' Consent: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court bench comprising Justice Manish Pitale held that any amendments, revisions, or modifications in fees of an arbitrator must only occur with the consent of the parties, as outlined in the tripartite agreement and per Schedule IV of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Observing a need for extra time, the Respondent approached the High Court and …

Section 11 Petition Can Be Filed Only After Failure Of Parties To Appoint Arbitrator Within 30 Days Of Notice, Limitation Act Applies: Delhi High Court
1 year, 1 month ago

Section 11 Petition Can Be Filed Only After Failure Of Parties To Appoint Arbitrator Within 30 Days Of Notice, Limitation Act Applies: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench, comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh, held that a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can only be filed after a notice of arbitration has been issued and there has been a failure to make the appointment of an arbitrator within 30 days. The bench held that the limitation period arises …

Exclusive Supervisory Jurisdiction Granted To Court Receiving First Application Under Arbitration Act, Bombay HC Limits Territorial Jurisdiction
1 year, 1 month ago

Exclusive Supervisory Jurisdiction Granted To Court Receiving First Application Under Arbitration Act, Bombay HC Limits Territorial Jurisdiction

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court bench comprising Justice Neela Gokhale held that in cases where an application has been made in a court concerning an arbitration agreement, that court alone possesses jurisdiction over an application for appointment of arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner filed a petition under Section 11 …

Supreme Court Judgements On Arbitration In 2023
1 year, 2 months ago

Supreme Court Judgements On Arbitration In 2023

Live Law  

Starting Point Of Limitation U/ Section 34 Arbitration Act In Cases Of Suo Motu Correction Of Award: Supreme Court Explains The Supreme Court observed that the starting point for the limitation under Section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, in case of suo moto correction of the award, would be the date on which the correction was made and the corrected …

Statement Made Before The Arbitrator Withdrawing Objection To Unilateral Appointment Would Not Suffice 'Express Agreement' Required Under Section 12(5) Of The A&C Act: Delhi High Court
1 year, 2 months ago

Statement Made Before The Arbitrator Withdrawing Objection To Unilateral Appointment Would Not Suffice 'Express Agreement' Required Under Section 12(5) Of The A&C Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi has held that a statement made by a party's counsel before the Arbitrator withdrawing objection to unilateral appointment would not suffice 'express agreement' required under Section 12 of the A&C Act The bench of Justice Jyoti Singh reiterated that ineligibility of the arbitrator goes to the root of the matter and any award passed by …

Application For Removal Of Arbitrator Must Be Made Before Same ‘Court’ As Envisaged In s.2 (i) (e) & s.42 Of Arbitration Act: Calcutta High Court
1 year, 7 months ago

Application For Removal Of Arbitrator Must Be Made Before Same ‘Court’ As Envisaged In s.2 (i) (e) & s.42 Of Arbitration Act: Calcutta High Court

Live Law  

The Calcutta High Court recently dismissed an application filed by M/S Gammon Engineers and Contractors Private Limited u/s 11, 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for removal of arbitrator while challenging their unilateral appointment. Therefore, the bar under Section 42 would lie and all applications to be made to a ‘court’ must be made to the …

Himachal Pradesh High Court Stays Arbitration Proceedings Commenced Without Fulfilling The Pre-Arbitration Condition Of Negotiation
1 year, 7 months ago

Himachal Pradesh High Court Stays Arbitration Proceedings Commenced Without Fulfilling The Pre-Arbitration Condition Of Negotiation

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has stayed the arbitration proceedings that were unilaterally commenced by a party without complying/fulfilling the pre-condition of negotiation as mandated by the terms of the agreement between the parties. The bench of Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan observed that when the dispute resolution clause in the agreement mandates the parties to explore negotiation before resorting to …

Plea That Claimant’s Claim Cannot Stand In The Absence Of A Third Entity, Can Be Raised Before The Arbitral Tribunal: Delhi High Court
1 year, 8 months ago

Plea That Claimant’s Claim Cannot Stand In The Absence Of A Third Entity, Can Be Raised Before The Arbitral Tribunal: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the plea that the claimant’s claim cannot stand in the absence of a third entity in the arbitral proceedings, is an aspect touching upon the maintainability of the claim sought to be raised before the Arbitral Tribunal. The court remarked that prima facie, the inter se rights and obligations of the petitioner and …

Arbitration Monthly Round Up- April 2023
1 year, 10 months ago

Arbitration Monthly Round Up- April 2023

Live Law  

Supreme Court: Arbitration Agreement In Unstamped Contract Which Is Exigible To Stamp Duty Not Enforceable: Supreme Court Holds By 3:2 Majority Case Title: M/s. Whether A Signed Copy Or Certified Copy Of The Award, Purpose Of S. 31 of A&C Act Is To Inform The Party: Bombay High Court Case Title: Rahul S/o Omprakash Gandhi vs The Akola Janta Commercial …

Court May Decline To Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Doesn’t Correlate To Arbitration Agreement: Delhi High Court Reiterates
1 year, 11 months ago

Court May Decline To Refer Parties To Arbitration If Dispute Doesn’t Correlate To Arbitration Agreement: Delhi High Court Reiterates

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that mere existence of an arbitration agreement or arbitration clause would not be sufficient to refer the parties to arbitration and that even in the presence of an arbitration agreement, the court may decline to refer the parties to arbitration if the dispute does not correlate to the said agreement. The bench of Justice …

Clause Captioned As “Arbitration”, Doesn’t Conclusively Imply Mandatory Nature Of Arbitration: Bombay High Court
2 years ago

Clause Captioned As “Arbitration”, Doesn’t Conclusively Imply Mandatory Nature Of Arbitration: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the use of the word ‘can’ in the relevant clause has the effect of qualifying Arbitration as a mode of settlement, and the mere fact that a particular clause is captioned as “Arbitration”, does not conclusively imply the mandatory nature of arbitration when the option is left to the parties to settle their …

Person Ineligible To Act As Arbitrator U/s 12(5) Cannot Appoint Another Arbitrator For Determining The Dispute: Himachal Pradesh High Court
2 years ago

Person Ineligible To Act As Arbitrator U/s 12(5) Cannot Appoint Another Arbitrator For Determining The Dispute: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court on Monday ruled that any person who becomes ineligible to act as an Arbitrator in terms of Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act cannot appoint/nominate another Arbitrator for determining the dispute.Section 12 provides that notwithstanding any prior agreement to the contrary, any person whose relationship with the parties or counsel or. The Himachal …

Court Not Powerless To Appoint Appropriate Arbitral Tribunal, Even If Party Forfeits Its Right Under Arbitration Clause: Bombay High Court
2 years, 1 month ago

Court Not Powerless To Appoint Appropriate Arbitral Tribunal, Even If Party Forfeits Its Right Under Arbitration Clause: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that even if a party’s right to appoint its nominee in the Arbitral Tribunal as per the arbitration clause, is forfeited because it failed to exercise its right within the statutory period after receiving the notice invoking arbitration, it would not render the Court powerless to appoint an appropriate Arbitral Tribunal, after considering the …

Arbitral Reference Can’t Be Made Mechanically Under Section 8, If Some Parties To Suit Are Non-Signatories To Arbitration Agreement: Bombay High Court
2 years, 2 months ago

Arbitral Reference Can’t Be Made Mechanically Under Section 8, If Some Parties To Suit Are Non-Signatories To Arbitration Agreement: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that if the plaintiff seeks relief in a suit against parties, some of whom are not signatories to the arbitration agreement, the matter cannot be mechanically referred to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court took note that the Long Form Agreement, containing the arbitration clause, was signed …

Delivery Of Arbitration Award To Employee/ Agent Of Party, Not A Valid Delivery Under Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
2 years, 2 months ago

Delivery Of Arbitration Award To Employee/ Agent Of Party, Not A Valid Delivery Under Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that delivery of arbitral award, to be effective under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, must be made to a person who has direct knowledge of the arbitral proceedings. Challenging the arbitral award, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 34 of the A&C Act before the Delhi High Court. The petitioner, Monika Oli, …

Correspondence Between Parties Cannot Overrule Clear Intention Under Agreement Providing For Optional Arbitration: Bombay High Court
2 years, 2 months ago

Correspondence Between Parties Cannot Overrule Clear Intention Under Agreement Providing For Optional Arbitration: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that where a clause stipulated that the parties ‘may’ be referred to arbitration, the said clause does not constitute an arbitration agreement, despite the fact that the clause conferred a binding nature upon the decision of the Arbitrator. After certain disputes arose between the parties under the Master Service Agreement, the petitioner invoked the …

Request For Appointment Of Arbitrator, Is Not A Waiver Of Right To Disqualify Under S. 12 (5) Of The Act: Delhi High Court
2 years, 2 months ago

Request For Appointment Of Arbitrator, Is Not A Waiver Of Right To Disqualify Under S. 12 (5) Of The Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a unilateral request made by one of the parties for setting the appointment procedure in motion, as provided in the arbitration agreement, would not constitute an agreement falling under the proviso to Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to waive off the disqualification contemplated under Section 12. The bench of …

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 27 November To 3 December, 2022
2 years, 3 months ago

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 27 November To 3 December, 2022

Live Law  

Bombay High Court: Participation In Arbitral Proceedings, Does Not Disentitle Party To Challenge Award On Ground Of Unilateral Appointment Of Arbitrator: Bombay High Court Case Title: Naresh Kanayalal Rajwani & Ors. The Bombay High Court has ruled that merely because a party participated in the arbitration proceedings, it is not disentitled from challenging the arbitral award on the ground that …

Participation In Arbitral Proceedings, Does Not Disentitle Party To Challenge Award On Ground Of Unilateral Appointment Of Arbitrator: Bombay High Court
2 years, 3 months ago

Participation In Arbitral Proceedings, Does Not Disentitle Party To Challenge Award On Ground Of Unilateral Appointment Of Arbitrator: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that merely because a party participated in the arbitration proceedings, it is not disentitled from challenging the arbitral award on the ground that the arbitration proceedings were vitiated due to the unilateral appointment of the Arbitrator by the opposite party, falling foul of Section 12 read with the Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration and …

Arbitration, Invoked Without Authority, The Defect Can't Be Ratified With Fresh Board Resolution: Bombay High Court
2 years, 4 months ago

Arbitration, Invoked Without Authority, The Defect Can't Be Ratified With Fresh Board Resolution: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the issue whether the arbitration was invoked and the Statement of Claim was filed, by a person duly authorized by the claimant, goes to the root of the matter, with respect to which the arbitral tribunal may make a final arbitral award. Thus, the Court held that the order passed by the arbitral …

Mere Reference To Proposal Containing An Arbitration Clause, Unilaterally Signed By One Party, Would Not Amount To An Arbitration Agreement: Bombay High Court
2 years, 6 months ago

Mere Reference To Proposal Containing An Arbitration Clause, Unilaterally Signed By One Party, Would Not Amount To An Arbitration Agreement: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that in an agreement executed by both the parties which contains independent terms and conditions, a mere reference to a proposal containing an arbitration clause which was unilaterally signed by one party, would not amount to an arbitration agreement coming into existence between the parties. The petitioner argued that the said proposal containing an …

Discover Related