SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(SC) 443

H.K.SEMA
SHIVNATH RAI HARNARAIN (INDIA) LTD – Appellant
Versus
ABDUL GHAFFAR ABDUL REHMAN – Respondent


H. K. SEMA,J.

( 1 ) THIS is an application filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short "the Act")for appointment of an Arbitrator.

( 2 ) I have heard Dr. A. M. Singhvi, learned senior counsel for the applicant and Mr. Kailash Vasdev, learned senior counsel for the respondents at length.

( 3 ) THE sole question that arises for consideration in this petition is as to whether an application under Section 11 (6) of the Act is maintainable?

( 4 ) IN view of the order that I propose to pass, it may not be necessary to recite the entire facts, leading to the filing of the present application.

( 5 ) SUFFICE it to say that contract Nos. 2001-SI/25, 2001-SI/26 both dated 12th January 2001 and Contract no. 2001-SII/41 dated 28th February 2001 were amended/modified by way of a common addendum No. 1 on 2. 3. 2001. By an addendum dated 2nd March, 2001 clause (ii)was introduced. It reads:

" (ii) Settlement of disputes through Indian arbitration Council, Delhi. "

( 6 ) THE dispute having arisen and as agreed to by both the parties the matter was referred to one Mr. Samuel J. Marshall, who was agent for both the parties in the transactions and who also agreed to





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top