Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Sap Electro Contracts (pvt) Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Reiyukai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Suresh Kumar Kait, J. - The present petition has been filed under Section 11 of the arbitration and Conciliation act, 1996 seeking appointment of sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes inter-se the parties.
2. according to petitioner, respondent was awarded the work order for Internal Electrical Works for Institutional Religious Building 'Eternal Oasis' for total amount of Rs.82,60,000/- inclusive of all taxes e.g. Labour Cess, WCT & GST as applicable on the basis of Schedule of Rates enclosed with the work order for supply, installation, testing and commissioning of Internal Electrical Works at the project site and a Contract agreement was signed with all terms and conditions including BOQ. Petitioner claims to have started the said work according to the specification as per BOQ and satisfaction of respondent's consulting Engineers/Project Managers and thereafter drawings were made final from respondent's side and mobilization advance received. Thereafter on 18.04.2018, respondent awarded new work order to the petitioner for supply, installation, testing and commissioning of High Side Electrical Works Institutional Religious Building 'Eternal Oasis' for total amount of
Court can appoint an arbitrator when both parties consent to arbitration for resolving disputes, even amidst contractual disagreements.
The court's decision highlights the importance of honoring arbitration clauses in agreements and the appointment of arbitrators to resolve disputes.
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator is impermissible; parties must appoint an arbitrator jointly or seek court appointment to ensure unbiased dispute resolution.
Non-compliance by a party allows the court to appoint a sole Arbitrator under the Arbitration Act when arbitration notices are ignored.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to appoint an independent arbitrator for adjudication of disputes based on the arbitration agreement.
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'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....
The court's authority to appoint an arbitrator in cases where the parties are unable to agree, in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court and the provisions of the Arbitration & Concil....
The court's decision emphasized the appointment of a sole Arbitrator to adjudicate disputes under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
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
