Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Ashutosh Kumar
3i Info Tech Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar through Additional Chief Secretary, Planning and Development Department – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. request for appointment of arbitrator under arbitration act. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. objection on procedural grounds for arbitration initiation. (Para 7 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 3. description of escalation procedure and mediation prior to arbitration. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. petition dismissed due to premature request for arbitration. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 5. directions for time-bound resolution of disputes and mediation. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT :
Ashutosh Kumar, ACJ.
We have heard Mr. Dhananjay Kumar, the learned Advocate for the request petitioner and Mr. P.K. Shahi, the learned Advocate General for the State.
2. The petitioner has made a request under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an arbitrator.
3. It is not in dispute that a master service agreement dated 02.08.2016 was executed between the Planning and Development Department, Government of Bihar and the petitioner for selection of System Integrated IT Solution for Mukhyamantri Nischay Swayam Sahayta Bhatta Yojna Student Credit Card Scheme Skill Development Programme.
4. According to the petitioner, as required under the agreement, he initiated the work
A request for arbitration under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is premature if prior dispute resolution procedures, including mediation, are not exhausted.
The main legal point established is the applicability of Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in cases where a party fails to appoint an arbitrator within the stipulated time ....
The conciliation process under the Arbitration Agreement was not mandatory, and the petitioner's attempts at mutual consultation satisfied the requirements of the contract.
The appointment of the arbitrator must be in accordance with the arbitration agreement and must satisfy the provisions of the arbitration act.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is the court's authority to appoint an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 when a dispute arises and no arbi....
The court held that its review under Section 11(6) is limited to confirming the existence of an arbitration agreement, without delving into substantive disputes, which is for the Arbitrator to decide....
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
