2009 Supreme(AP) 28

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
V.V.S. RAO, J.
News Today (P) Limited, T.V. Division - Appellant
v.
S. Hari Prasad and others - Respondent
Arbitration Application No.6 of 2008
Decided on : 29-01-2009.

Headnote:(a) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 11 (5). 11 (6), 11 (7), 16 and 2 (3) r/w Section 33, Arbitration Act, 1940 - Section 11 empowers the Chief Justice of High Court to appoint Arbitrator. The New Act minimizes supervisory role of Courts and they can intervene only after the award is made - Arbitral Tribunal is all-powerful to decide its own Jurisdiction and validity of the contract and arbitration clause - Validity of arbitration agreement cannot decided by Chief Justice/his Designate.

       2007 (6) SCJ 171; 2008 (12) SCALE 654; 2006 (5) ALT 2 (SC); 2006 (5) SCJ 105; 1999 (4) ALT 1 (SC); 2007 (7) SCJ 600 - Relied upon.

       (b) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Sections 11,11 (6) and 16 (1) - Validity and enforceability of agreement and/or contract are outside the purview of section 11 (6) of 1996 Act - They fall under jurisdiction of the arbitrator.

       (2000) 4 SCC 272 - Distinguished

       MAXIM - “Ex nihilo nil fit” or nothing comes out of nothing is a Common law principle,