Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Rahul Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Rattan India Enterprises Ltd – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Suresh Kumar Kait, J. - The present petition has been filed under Section 11(5) of the arbitration and Conciliation act, 1996 seeking appointment of sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes inter-se the parties.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that petitioner is promoter of respondent No.2 & respondent No.1 is a company incorporated under the Indian Companies act, 1956. Shareholders' agreement dated 28.04.2021 was entered into between petitioner and respondents & Share Subscription agreement dated 28.04.2021 was entered into between petitioner and respondent No.1 to 6.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that upon execution of aforesaid agreements, in terms of Clause 3.7 of Shareholders' agreement dated 28.04.2021, the nominee of respondent No.1 was appointed as the Chief Financial Officer and another recommendation of the respondent No.1 was appointed as the Chief Executive Officer of respondent No.2. Further, in terms of Clause 3.2 of the said agreement, the composition of the Board of Directors of the respondent No.2 has been and continues to be 2 Directors of the respondent No.1.
4. It is further submitted that pursuant to execution of aforesaid agreemen
The court emphasized the arbitrability of the disputes and the appointment of an independent arbitrator to consider all issues raised by the parties.
The court confirmed the arbitrability of disputes arising from contractual breaches and appointed a sole Arbitrator as per the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, ensuring all matters remain open....
The main legal point established is the court's authority to appoint a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the arbitration and Conciliation act, 1996 when the parties fail to mutually appoint one,....
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.
The court emphasized the importance of compliance with the arbitration and Conciliation act, 1996 and directed the appointment of arbitrators as per the agreement reached by the parties.
The court's examination under Section 11(6A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is limited to determining the existence of an arbitration agreement, with substantive issues reserved for the arbi....
The court confirmed that disputes between shareholders are arbitrable under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing the limited scope of examination regarding the existence of an arbitratio....
The court's decision emphasized the importance of appointing the same arbitrator to hear disputes related to the same composite transaction to avoid conflicting findings.
The court can appoint an Arbitrator when parties fail to mutually agree, as per agreement provisions and arbitration law.
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
