Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Jyoti Singh, J.
Axalta Coating System Pvt. Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
Grand Auto Capital - Respondent
Arb.P. 374 of 2019
Decided On : 22-01-2020
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appointment of arbitrator under section 11(6) (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. examination of arbitration agreement validity (Para 4) |
| 3. conclusion on arbitrator’s appointment and terms (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
JUDGMENT
Jyoti Singh, J. (Oral)--This is a petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (`Act') seeking appointment of an Arbitrator.
2. Vide order dated 29.11.2019, this Court had permitted the petitioner to carry out substituted service on the respondents. Affidavit of service on the respondents through publication has been filed on 26.12.2019. Publication in respect of respondent No. 1 has been carried out in `Hindustan Times' (English) and `Nav Bharat Times' (Hindi) on 28.11.2019 and in respect of respondent No. 2 in `Times of India' (English) and `Swadesh' (Hindi) on 26.12.2019.
3. Matter has been called twice. However, there is no appearance on behalf of the respondents. It appears that the respondents are not interested in defending the matter. Accordingly, respondents are proceeded ex-parte.
4. While examining a petition under Section 11(6) of the Act, the Court is only required to examine the existence and the validity of the Arbitration Agreement. This has been clearly held by the Supreme Court in the judgment of M/s. Mayavati Trading Pvt. Ltd. vs. Pradyuat Deb Burman, (Civil Appeal No.7023/2019, decided on 05.09.2019) and is the mandate of Section 11(6A) of the Act. Since the respondents have chosen not to appear and have been proceeded ex-parte, the existence and validity of the Arbitration Agreement is not in dispute. Accordingly, this Court appoints Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate, as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.
5. The address and mobile number of the learned Arbitrator is as under:
Mr. Rahul Malhotra, Advocate
D-314, LGF Defence Colony,
New Delhi.
Mobile: 9899218215
6. The learned Arbitrator shall give disclosure under Section 12 of the Act before entering upon reference.
7. Fee of the Arbitrator shall be fixed as per Fourth Schedule of the Act.
8. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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
