Back
NAVIN CHAWLA
Manju Gupta – Appellant
Versus
Meenu Singhal – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Navin Chawla, J. (Oral)--This petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the `Act') praying for the following relief:
"a. Allow the present petition and appoint the Hon'ble Mr. Justice C.M. Nayyar (Former Judge of this Hon'ble Court) as an arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties by making the reference of the disputes under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, in view of the fact that this Hon'ble Court vide its judgment and order dated 22.1.2021, appointed Justice C.M. Nayyar as sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the other signatories of the MFS and the petitioners, to which the respondents are also the signatories."
2. It is the case of the petitioners that before filing of the present petition, the petitioners had invoked the Arbitration Agreement between the parties as is contained in the `Memorandum Recording Family Settlement' dated 28.04.2007 (hereinafter referred to as the `Family Settlement'), inter alia, against the husband/father of the respondents-Shri Pawan Singhal, vide notice dated 03.03.2020. On failure of the parties agreeing to the appo
The Court emphasized that all disputes and questions of maintainability should be settled together by the arbitrator, and the Court should not venture into the plea of limitation and other issues rai....
The period of limitation for filing a petition seeking appointment of an Arbitrator is distinct from the period of limitation for the substantive claims made in the underlying commercial contract.
The proper invocation of an Arbitration Agreement and the non-supersession of an existing agreement by a subsequent settlement were central legal principles established in the judgment.
The Court's jurisdiction at the stage of Section 11 of the Act is limited, and the Arbitral Tribunal is the preferred authority to decide questions of non-arbitrability.
The referral court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act must determine the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appoint an arbitrator if satisfied.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of an arbitrator must be in accordance with the agreed procedure in the contract. If the appointment is not in line with the a....
Point of law : Appointment Arbitrator - Arbitrator making necessary disclosures under Section 12(1) of the Act and not being ineligible under Section 12(5) of the Act.
A party can seek arbitration anew after an arbitral award is set aside, and a notice under Section 21 is not necessary unless the arbitration clause is freshly invoked.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the conclusive decision on the limitation plea and the importance of expeditious disposal of arbitration matters.
The existence of an arbitrable dispute, the validity of the arbitration agreement, and the existence of an arbitrable dispute are to be determined by the arbitral tribunal.
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
