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

2004 Supreme(Del) 774

P.C.JAIN
SHYAM TELECOM LTD – Appellant
Versus
ARM LTD – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.L.SANGHI, RAJIV NAYAR, ROHIT TANDON, Siddharth Dutta, SURESH SINGH

R. C. Jain, J.

( 1 ). A short but important question - whether the mandate of an arbitrator terminates on the expiry of the stipulated period for making the award within the meaning of Section 14 of the Arbitration and Conciliation act, 1996? has arisen for determination in this case.

( 2 ) M/s. Shyam Telecom Ltd / petitioner has filed this petition under section 14 (2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (to be called as the Act) for declaring that the mandate of the sole Arbitrator has terminated on 14. 11. 200 on the expiry of six months period for making the award mentioned in Clause 3 of Article IV of Divestment Agreement and consequently the arbitration proceedings and the mandate of the Arbitrator had come to an end.

( 3 ) THE relevant facts, in brief, are that the parties had entered into a divestment Agreement in 1997. Clause 3 of Article IV of the Divestment agreement inter-alia contains an Arbitration Agreement for reference of the disputes between the parties through Arbitration. The said clause reads as under: "in the event of any dispute, difference of claim arising out of or in connection with or in relation to this Agreement then as such disputes shall be



























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