ARUN KUMAR
MSA NEDERLAND B. V. – Appellant
Versus
LARSEN & TOUBRO LTD. – Respondent
ORDER
1. THIS IS AN APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 11 OF THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 PRAYING FOR APPOINTMENT OF A SOLE ARBITRATOR. THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN PLACED BEFORE ME AS A NOMINEE OF THE LEARNED CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA FOR NECESSARY ORDERS. THE PETITIONER IS A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE NETHERLANDS WHILE THE RESPONDENT IS AN INDIAN COMPANY. THE PARTIES HAD ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT REGARDING CERTAIN WORKS TO BE EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER. DISPUTES APPEARED TO HAVE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PARTIES. THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES ADMITTEDLY CONTAINS AN ARBITRATION CLAUSE WHICH RUNS AS UNDER:
"23. ARBITRATION.- ANY DISPUTE OR CLAIM ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THE AGREEMENT, ITS BREACH OR INTERPRETATION THEREOF, SHALL BE DETERMINED BY REFERENCE TO A SOLE ARBITRATOR TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 AND THE RULES FRAMED THERE UNDER. THE VENUE OF THE ARBITRATION SHALL BE AT ENGLAND (UK). THE LANGUAGE TO BE USED IN THE ARBITRATION SHALL BE THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE. THIS CLAUSE SHALL SURVIVE THE EXPIRATION OR TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT."
2. AS PER THE ABOVE AGREEMENT A SOLE ARBITRATOR HAS TO BE APPOINTED. PARTIES HAVE BEEN UNABLE T
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.