Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
M.S. JAWALKAR, J
Salasar Cotex, Through Its Proprietor Mrs. Aruna Jagdish Sarda – Appellant
Versus
The Maharashtra State Co-operative Cotton Grower’s Marketing Federation Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard finally with the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties.
3. Present Application is filed for appointment of sole Arbitrator in accordance with the terms of Clause-15 of the Agreement for conducting an arbitration between the Applicants and the Respondents under the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the “Act of 1996”), on account of absolute failure of the Respondent Authorities to acknowledge the requests made to them for appointment of Arbitrator. The said request for appointment of an Arbitrator is arising on account of illegal deduction made by the Respondents from the amount due and payable to the Applicants for supply of cotton bales.
4. It is submitted that the Applicants are owners of cotton Ginning and Pressing factories and Respondent No.1 is a body registered under the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 having it’s head office and an Administrative offices and its addresses as mentioned in cause title. It is further contention of the Applicants that the Applicants are owners of cotton ginning-pressing factories with whom, as per usual pr
Joint applications for arbitration under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 are not maintainable when individual agreements exist, necessitating separate proceedings.
The interpretation of Section 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is that where the mandate of an arbitrator terminates, a substitute arbitrator shall be appointed according to the ru....
Pendency of proceedings before another tribunal does not preclude the Court from appointing an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Act of 1996.
An application for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is maintainable despite previous delays, as no arbitral proceedings were initiated un....
The main legal point established is the court's authority to appoint a substitute arbitrator under Section 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, when the initially appointed arbitrator fa....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principle of minimal judicial intervention in the arbitral process, emphasizing the competence of the arbitrator to decide all preliminary issu....
Arbitration clause persists despite challenges; disputes require arbitrator resolution.
The court ruled that issues of limitation and jurisdiction are to be determined by the arbitrator, not by the court at the pre-reference stage under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act....
The right to appoint an arbitrator is not forfeited by serving notice for appointment; jurisdictional interventions can temporarily affect appointment rights, and the court's role is to ensure compli....
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
