BRIJESH KUMAR
ANGANG GROUP INTNL. TRADE CORPORATION – Appellant
Versus
PIPAVAV RAILWAY CORPORATION LTD. – Respondent
Judgment
BRIJESH KUMAR, J.
( 1 ) THIS petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short "the Act") has come up before me on being designated for appointing an arbitrator, by the Honble the Chief Justice of India.
( 2 ) LEARNED Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent raised an objection that there is no concluded contract between the parties, hence no arbitration agreement as well. It is also emphasised that no agreement has been executed by the parties. That being the position, there is no occasion for the petitioner to move the petition for appointment of an arbitrator. It has also been indicated that the letter of intent (LOI) as issued, was cancelled by the respondent by means of a letter dated 4-6-2002, since the bank guarantee furnished was a conditional bank guarantee and not unconditional as per stipulation. It is contended that though the arbitrator is competent to decide any dispute regarding existence or validity of the agreement but prima facie there must be some agreement on the basis of which arbitration clause may be invoked. In absence of any such prima facie material or evidence of an agreement, the provisions of Section 1
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.