Back
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, MANOJ MISRA
Office for Alternative Architecture – Appellant
Versus
Ircon Infrastructure and Services Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. the appeal challenges high court's exclusion of claims. (Para 2) |
| 2. the appellant argues for full claim consideration. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court considers the limit of its section 11 powers. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 4. legislative intent clarifies judicial limits in arbitrator appointment. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. clarifies the high court's error in separating claims. (Para 12) |
| 6. the appeal is allowed; the high court's order is set aside. (Para 13) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Leave granted.
(1) A person of any nationality may be an arbitrator, unless otherwise agreed by the parties.
(3) Failing any agreement referred to in sub-section (2), in an arbitration with three arbitrators, each party shall appoint one arbitrator, and the two appointed arbitrators shall appoint the third arbitrator who shall act as the presiding arbitrator.
Provided that in respect of those High Court jurisdictions, where no graded arbitral institution are available, then, the Chief Justice of the concerned High Court may maintain a panel of arbitrators for discharging the functions and duties of arbitral institution and any reference to the arbitrator shall be deemed to be an arbitral institution for the purposes of this
The Supreme Court ruled that during the appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, the court should only assess the existence of an arbitration agreement and refrain from a....
Appointment of Arbitrator – Arbitration agreement is foundation of arbitration – Referral Court before appointing Arbitral Tribunal will have to be prima facie satisfied that arbitration agreement as....
Appointment of Arbitrator – Issue of non-arbitrability of dispute is basic for arbitration as it relates to very jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunal – Arbitral Tribunal may lack jurisdiction for severa....
A valid arbitration agreement exists even if appointment procedures are unenforceable; courts should minimize intervention and uphold party autonomy in arbitration processes.
The court reaffirmed that the existence of an arbitration agreement must be established, and disputes should generally be referred to arbitration unless clearly non-arbitrable.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
