Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Amazing India Contractors Private Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Indian Railway Stations Development Corporation Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Oral)
The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.
I.A. 12235/2021 (exemption)
1. Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application is disposed of.
Arb. P. 923/2021 & I.A.12234/2021
3. The present petition has been filed by petitioner seeking appointment of a Sole Arbitrator under the provisions of Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
4. Petitioner, a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, claims to be involved in the business of Facilities Management and Infrastructure Management Projects throughout India. Respondent is said to be a Special Purpose vehicle and a Joint Venture company of IRCON International Limited, a Government of India Undertaking, under the Ministry of Railways and Rail Land Development Authority incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956.
5. According to petitioner, on 09.09.2019 the respondent issued Notice Inviting Tender No. IRSD/HQ/TENDER/2019/21/SC/ Parking issued by the Indian Railway Station Development Corporation for the project "Management of Parking Area at Secunderabad Railway Station Along with Access Control for a period of 3 (Three) years" and petitioner submitted a bid theret
: In cases where one party has a right to appoint a sole arbitrator, its choice will always have an element of exclusivity in determining or charting the course for dispute resolution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of an Arbitrator must comply with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and the choice of the Arbitrator must not ha....
The necessity for mutual agreement in appointing a sole arbitrator is critical to uphold fairness in arbitration processes, emphasizing the exclusivity of choice and impartiality in dispute resolutio....
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator by a party with a vested interest is improper and contradicts established legal principles regarding impartiality in arbitration.
Point of Law : 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 ....
The Managing Director cannot arbitrarily appoint an arbitrator if their interest affects impartiality; such appointments contravene Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act.
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....
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 main legal point established in the judgment is the exclusivity of the right to appoint a sole arbitrator when one party has such a right, as per the dictum of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
The unilateral appointment of an arbitrator violates the principle of unbiased adjudication, requiring mutual agreement between parties for such appointments.
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
