Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Ashutosh Builders Contractors And Engineers – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Suresh Kumar Kait, J. - Petitioner has filed the present petition under the provisions of Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of sole arbitrator for adjudication of all the disputes with respondents in terms of arbitration clause 70 of IAFW 2249.
2. Petitioner is a contractor and has been engaged by the respondent on several occasions for carrying out various constructions and other activities of respondent. Respondent is an establishment fully controlled and supervised by the Ministry of Defence, Union of India and is a state under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Respondent no.1 is Union of India through Engineer in Chief (E-IN-C) of the Wing of Army for carrying out works of infrastructure. Respondent nos.2, 3 & 4 are subordinate offices to respondent no.1.
3. Petitioner was awarded the acceptance letter of the contract agreement vide letter dated 28.06.2019 for the work "CA NO.CWE/WEST-02/2019-20;SPL REPAIR OF ROMNEY HUTS T-156,T-165,T-166,T-167,T-168 AND T-169 OF CENTRAL STORAGE FACILITY AT CVD UNDER GE (WEST)DELHI CANTT.-10" to the tune of Rs.31,19,233/-.
4. Thereafter, respondent no.4 issued work order dated 02.07.2019
No party can unilaterally appoint an arbitrator; appointment requires either mutual consent or judicial appointment to ensure impartiality.
The unilateral appointment of an arbitrator violates the principle of unbiased adjudication, requiring mutual agreement between parties for such appointments.
Arbitration - Appointment of Arbitrator - In cases where one party has a right to appoint a sole arbitrator, its choice will always has an element of exclusivity in determining or charting course for....
The court has the authority to appoint a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 when the parties fail to agree on the appointment.
No single party can be permitted to unilaterally appoint the Arbitrator, as it would defeat the purpose of unbiased adjudication of dispute between parties.
The court has the authority to appoint a sole Arbitrator in accordance with the Arbitration Clause forming a part of the Contract.
Whatever advantage a party may derive by nominating an arbitrator of its choice would get counter balanced by equal power with the other party. But, in a case where only one party has a right to appo....
As per Section 11 (13) of the Act now arbitration is required to be decided within 30 days.
The court confirmed that consent of both parties for the appointment of an arbitrator fulfills the requirements under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, enabling dispute resolutio....
A party cannot unilaterally appoint an arbitrator when disputes arise, as this infringes on unbiased adjudication rights, affirming established legal principles.
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
