DINESH KUMAR SHARMA
Kalyan Toll Infrastructure Ltd – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J. - By way of the present petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the "A&C Act") the petitioner seeks the appointment of an independent sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes interse arising between the parties pertaining to the Contract dated 30.10.2015.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that respondent no.2 awarded a contract bearing no. DGMAP/PHASE-II/MHOW/PKG-13(R&C) of 2015-16 to the petitioner to complete the balance construction works of the residential accommodation at Military Headquarters of War (hereinafter referred to as MHOW) valued at 1,63,03,53,010 for which petitioner also furnished a Performance Bank Guarantee to the tune of Rs. 8,15,18,000/- in favor of the respondent no.2.
3. Consequently, the petitioner informed about the various hindrances to respondent No. 5/Project Manager Married Accommodation Project (MAP) for carrying out the work of construction of the residential accommodation at MHOW through various letters.
4. Pursuant to which on 30.05.2019, the petitioner complet
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 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 court emphasized the importance of a broad-based panel of arbitrators, providing parties with a wider choice for nominating their arbitrator.
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 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....
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 court determined an arbitrator's jurisdiction depends on claims being notified by the General Manager; failure to do so limits arbitration eligibility.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of neutrality and impartiality of the Arbitrator in the appointment process, as well as the need for a broad-based panel of arbitrat....
Parties to arbitration agreements must nominate arbitrators from a broad-based panel, ensuring independence and neutrality, while upholding party autonomy as per the SAROD Rules.
The court ruled that the appointment of arbitrators from the respondent's panel was valid, maintaining that established legal precedent surrounding impartiality does not support the petitioner's clai....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.