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

2021 Supreme(Cal) 175

DEBANGSU BASAK
Amit Kumar Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Dipak Prasad – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Jishnu Choudhury, Advocate, Ujjaini Chatterjee, Advocate, Sreenita Ghosh, Advocate, Indra Kant Jha, Advocate

JUDGMENT

Debangsu Basak, J. - The petitioner has invoked the provisions of Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for extension of time to conclude the reference by a period as may be deemed fit and appropriate by the Court.

2. Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that, the parties entered into an agreement dated April 7, 2015. Such agreement had an arbitration clause. Disputes and differences had arisen between the parties. The petitioner had invoked arbitration clause contained in such agreement by a notice dated February 3, 2018 for the resolution of the disputes and differences between the parties. The arbitration clause had allowed the petitioner to nominate its arbitrator. Arbitration clause had also permitted the respondent to nominate his arbitrator. Although the petitioner had invoked its arbitrator, the respondent failed to do so. Consequently, the petitioner approached this Hon'ble Court under Section 11 of the Act of 1996 being A.P. No. 239 of 2018 for constitution of the arbitral tribunal. By an order dated June 29, 2020, the Court had disposed of such application by constituting the arbitral tribunal. The arbitral tribunal had

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