Back
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Mos Utility Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Indian Railways Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. (IRCTC) – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Neena Bansal Krishna, J. (ORAL)
1. The present petition under Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "A&C Act, 1996") has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking termination of the mandate of Shri Vinod Ashthana (former Director, IRCTC), Sole Arbitrator in the pending Arbitration proceedings and also for appointment of a former Judge of this Court as the substitute Arbitrator.
2. Facts in brief are that the petitioner-Company has been doing business with the respondent-IRCTC since 2012 as a Principal Service Provider of IRCTC (hereinafter referred to as "PSC") for its e-ticketing business which typically had two Agreements, namely; (i) Agreement (Internet Cafe Services) - ICS Agreement; and (ii) Agreement (Web Services Business to Business) - B2B Agreement.
3. It is submitted that under these two Agreements, the petitioner-Company provides e-ticketing services to IRCTC through appointment of sub-agents known as Retail Service Providers (hereinafter referred to as "RSPs").
4. It is asserted that the petitioner-Company also engaged in business with banks and NBFCs, wherein under contractual arrangement, the peti
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of impartiality and independence of the arbitrator, as well as the eligibility criteria for arbitrators under the A&C Act, 1996.
The unilateral appointment of a Sole Arbitrator by a party in conflict with statutory provisions and judicial judgments is impermissible. The waiver of the right to object and the criteria for impart....
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator by a party with an interest in disputes is invalid and conflicts with the impartiality requirement in arbitration law.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the proviso allowing parties to waive disqualification through ....
Point of Law : It is not open for the petitioner to challenge the learned Arbitrator on the ground that there are justifiable doubts as to his independence and impartiality in terms of the Guidelines....
The petitioner must first seek termination of the existing Arbitrator's mandate through the appropriate civil court before requesting a new Arbitrator, as the existing proceedings had commenced.
The de jure disqualification of an Arbitrator under A&C Act, 1996, Section 14(1) leads to the termination of the mandate and the appointment of a substitute Arbitrator.
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator by a party with vested interests breaches principles of fairness and impartiality, rendering such appointment invalid under arbitration laws.
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
