VIBHU BAKHRU
T. K. Engineering Consortium Pvt Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Director (projects) Rites Ltd & Anr – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Vibhu Bakhru, J. - The petitioner, T.K. Engineering Consortium Pvt. Ltd. (hereafter 'TKE'), is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in providing Road Construction and other Engineering services.
2. Tke has filed the present petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the 'A&C Act'), inter alia, praying that an arbitral tribunal be constituted to adjudicate disputes that have arisen between the parties in relation to the Contract Agreement dated 27.02.2017 for "Development of Integrated Check Post at Dawki (Meghalaya) along Indo-Bangladesh Border".
3. Rites Ltd. (hereafter 'RITES') had issued a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) on 01.08.2016 for "Development of Integrated Check Post at Dawki (Meghalaya) along Indo-Bangladesh Border". TKE submitted its bid pursuant to the aforesaid tender. The same was accepted and, RITES issued a Letter of Award (LoA) dated 30.09.2016, on behalf of respondent no.3 (Land Ports Authority of India), awarding the contract to TKE. Thereafter, RITES also entered into the Contract Agreement dated 27.02.2017 (hereafter 'the Agreement').
4. Tke claims that the site in question was handed o
ACE Pipeline Contracts (P) Ltd. vs. Bharat Petroleum Corpn. Ltd.
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Ors. vs. M/s Raja Transport (P) Ltd.
Newton Engineering and Chemicals Limited vs. Indian Oil Corporation
North Eastern Railway and Ors. vs. Tripple Engineering Works
Northern Railway Admn., Ministry of Railway vs. Patel Engg. Co. Ltd.
Punj Lloyd Ltd. vs. Petronet MHB Ltd.
TRF Ltd. vs. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd.
Union of India vs. Bharat Battery Mfg. Co. (P) Ltd.
Union of India vs. U.P. State Bridge Corpn. Ltd.
Voestalpine Schienen GMBH vs. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Limited
The appointment of an arbitrator must comply with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, particularly Section 12(5), which disqualifies certain individuals from serving as arbitrators.
Point of law: As per the legal position settled by the Supreme Court in catena of judgments, the High Court has the jurisdiction under Section 11(6) of the said Act to nullify the appointments made b....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of an arbitrator must be in accordance with the law, and if found to be invalid, the court has the jurisdiction to set it asid....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the petitioner's failure to exhaust the mandatory dispute resolution procedure as per the contract rendered the petition premature and non-mai....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of party autonomy in arbitration, the enforceability of the entire arbitration clause, and the conditional acceptance of arbitration....
The main legal principle established in the judgment is the procedure for appointing arbitrators under the amended Act and the modified Clause 64 of the GCC, emphasizing the ineligibility of certain ....
Appointment of arbitrator by designation is permissible. Arbitration clauses in government contracts providing that an employee of the department will be the sole arbitrator are neither void nor unen....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.