Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Ashutosh Builders Contractors And Engineers – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Suresh Kumar Kait, J. - The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11 (6) of the arbitration and Conciliation act, 1996 seeking appointment of arbitrator for adjudication of disputes with respondent.
2. Petitioner claims to be a contractor, carrying out various construction related activities. Respondent No.1 is Union of India, under the Ministry of Defence; respondents No. 2 to 4 are subordinate of respondent No.1. Respondent No.4 is also the accepting authority of the contract work awarded to the petitioner. For the work Ca No. GE/DW-67/2019-20, petitioner claims to have entered into a Contract agreement dated 12.10.2019 with the respondent, which contained arbitration Clause-70 in case of any disputes between the parties.
3. after execution of the aforesaid Contract agreement, petitioner claims to have sent samples for 13 items for approval by the respondent such like LED fitting, Cable-1.5 sqmm, 2.5 sqmm, socket, switch etc. on 25.10.2019. However, respondent vide its communication dated 13.06.2020 informed the petitioner that samples of 04 items were not sent and further issued a Show Cause Notice dated 31.07.2020 stating that despite lapse of
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 to adjudicate disputes between parties.
Disputes under contracts with the Union of India are arbitrable, and the appointment of an independent arbitrator is necessary for their resolution under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Concilia....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to appoint an arbitrator to resolve disputed claims between parties in accordance with Section 11(6) of the Arbitration an....
The court's power to appoint an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the arbitrability of disputes under the agreement's Clause 25.
The court applied the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to appoint a sole arbitrator and ensure compliance before commencing the arbitration.
The court affirmed that when parties acknowledge disputes in a contractual agreement, an arbitrator must be appointed to resolve these disputes under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The court's decision emphasized the appointment of a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate disputes under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The court has the authority to appoint a sole Arbitrator in accordance with the Arbitration Clause forming a part of the Contract.
The court has the authority to appoint an arbitrator to resolve disputes based on the arbitration clause in the agreement and the arbitrability of the disputes.
The court's decision emphasizes the validity of invoking arbitration in accordance with the arbitration clause of the work order and the importance of compliance with Section 12 of the Arbitration an....
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
