Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Yogesh Khanna, J.
M/s Larsen & Toubro Limited – Appellant
Versus
Public Works Department – Respondent
Arb.P. 440 of 2023
Decided On : 04-07-2023
Arbitration - Appointment of Sole Arbitrator - Dispute Resolution Clause
Fact of the Case:
The petition was filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of a sole arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from a Contract Agreement.
Finding of the Court:
The court appointed Ms. Justice Mukta Gupta (Retd.) as the sole arbitrator to arbitrate the disputes between the parties, based on the reference to Article 23 (Dispute Resolution clause) in the Contract Agreement.
Issues: Appointment of sole arbitrator, interpretation of Dispute Resolution clause
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the provisions of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the reference to Article 23 in the Contract Agreement, which allowed for the appointment of a sole arbitrator to resolve disputes.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of, and the pending application, if any, was also disposed of. Ms. Justice Mukta Gupta (Retd.) was appointed as the sole arbitrator to arbitrate the disputes between the parties.
JUDGMENT
Yogesh Khanna, J. This petition is filed under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of a sole arbitrator to resolve the disputes and differences arising between the parties in relation to the Contract Agreement dated 08.11.2017.
2. The learned counsel for petitioner has referred to Article 23 viz. Dispute Resolution clause in the Contract Agreement dated 08.11.2017. The learned counsel for respondent also agrees to the appointment of a sole arbitrator to arbitrate the disputes between the parties.
3. Accordingly, Ms. Justice Mukta Gupta (Retd.) is hereby appointed as a sole arbitrator to arbitrate the disputes between the parties. The rights and contentions of the parties are left open.
4. In view of above, the petition stands disposed of. Pending application, if any, also stands disposed of. A copy of this order be communicated to the sole arbitrator. Order dasti.
The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the Dispute Resolution clause in the Contract Agreement and the provisions of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The court's authority to appoint a sole arbitrator based on the contract clause and the agreement of both parties.
The main legal point established is the court's adherence to the narrow examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement under Section 11(6A) and the emphasis on expeditious disposal of Secti....
The court's decision was based on the existence of the Arbitration Agreement and the non-dispute by the respondent of the referability of disputes to arbitration.
The court appointed an arbitrator as the parties consented to arbitration under the existing arbitration clause, complying with statutory requirements.
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....
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
