Back
SACHIN DATTA
Steelman Telecom Limited – Appellant
Versus
Power Grid Corporation of India Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sachin Datta, J.
1. The present petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "A&C Act") seeks appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.
2. The disputes between the parties have arisen with respect to the work executed by the petitioner in furtherance of tender bearing No. ERTCC/C&MI17-18/I-75/T-139/AMC_LMC/Pkg-C dated 23.02.2018 floated by the respondent and awarded to the petitioner for the "AMC of Bhubaneshwar and Cuttack Intracity and Talcher-Bhubaneswar Intercity OFC Network and LMC in various cities of Odisha for a period of three years".
3. Initially, a purchase order dated 12.10.2018 was issued by the respondent upon the petitioner. Clause 14 of the aforesaid purchase order incorporates the arbitration agreement, which is in the following terms:
"14.0 ARBITRATION
All disputes or differences in respect of which the decision, if any, of the Project Manager and/or the Head of the Implementing Authority has not become final or binding as aforesaid shall be settled by arbitration in the manner provided herein below:
The arbitration shall be conducted by a sole arbitrator in case t
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a truly broadbased panel of arbitrators and the achievement of genuine counterbalancing of power in the appointment procedure f....
The appointment procedure prescribed in clause 3.37 of the RFP was found to be restrictive and not broad-based, impinging upon the validity of the appointment procedure. The 'counter balancing' as co....
The main legal point established is that the appointment procedure for arbitrators must be broad-based and meet the requirement of counterbalancing as per the arbitration agreement.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a broad-based panel of arbitrators and the need for an independent and impartial arbitral tribunal, as mandated by previous jud....
Disqualified arbitrators cannot appoint successors; unilateral requests do not waive statutory disqualifications under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
An employee of the respondent or even a retired employee would be ineligible to be appointed as an arbitrator. The panel of arbitrators should be broad-based and should include persons with diverse b....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the procedure for appointment of Arbitral Tribunal as prescribed in the General Conditions of Contract was void and contrary to the scheme of ....
The court reinforced that impartiality and independence of arbitrators is essential, disqualifying those with vested interests under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The court determined an arbitrator's jurisdiction depends on claims being notified by the General Manager; failure to do so limits arbitration eligibility.
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
