Back
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Millennium Automation Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Hfcl Limited (Fonnally Himachal Futuristic Communications Ltd. ) – Respondent
JUDGMENT (Oral)
NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J.
1. A petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner.
2. It is submitted that in the year 2018, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) vide Purchase/Work Orders under GOFNMS Tract-I Project under Tender Ref. BSNL PO NO.CT/PO/14/2018 dated 19.07.2018 awarded a composite Work Order to respondent for procurement, supply, installation, testing and maintenance of GIS based Optical Fibre Cable Network Management Systems (GOFNMS), to be used by Defence Forces.
3. The respondent sub-contracted the three sub-projects namely: (i) Precision Air Conditioner' (PAC-Project), (ii) `Electrical Integration Work at Communication Nodes' (Electrical-Project) and (iii) `Uninterruptible Power Supply Project' (UPS-Project) to the petitioner vide separate composite Work Order/ Purchase Orders for each of the said three subprojects. The petitioner successfully and timely completed all the awarded works under the three sub-projects.
4. The respondent paid and released part of the invoiced amount for each of the sub-project and unjustifiably withheld the remaining part of the payable amount for each sub-proje
Court determined claims are not time-barred and appointment of an arbitrator is valid despite the respondent's challenges regarding jurisdiction and limitations.
Arbitrator shall ensure compliance of Section 12 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before commencing arbitration.
The unilateral appointment of an arbitrator is impermissible under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, unless there is a valid express waiver of ineligibility subsequent to the dispute arisin....
Unilateral appointment of an Arbitrator by a party is impermissible, and the ineligibility of the Arbitrator under Section 12(5) of the A&C Act is a valid ground for challenging the appointment.
The court ruled that the existence of a bona fide dispute necessitates arbitration, and a unilateral appointment mechanism for an arbitrator violated established legal standards.
Disputes concerning alleged payments are referable to arbitration despite claims of prior resolution efforts, where the existence of disputes was upheld.
The court established that an arbitration agreement exists between the petitioner and the respondents, as the executing agency was acting on behalf of the principal; claims related to payment dispute....
The court emphasized that its role under Section 11 is solely to confirm the existence of an arbitration agreement, minimizing intervention, and facilitating dispute resolution through arbitration.
The Court's decision emphasizes the need to examine each agreement independently for the existence of an arbitration agreement, and the importance of demonstrating the intention of the parties regard....
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
