Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
CS Electric Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Jop Power – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arbitration clause and its requirements (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. dispute over arbitrator appointment (Para 5 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. validity of arbitration appointment authority (Para 12 , 16 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. limits on parties selecting arbitrators (Para 13 , 14 , 18 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. court appoints arbitrator (Para 23 , 24 , 28 , 29) |
(Video-Conferencing)
1. This is a petition under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "1996 Act"), to refer the dispute, between the petitioner and the respondent, to arbitration.
2. Given the nature of the controversy, a brief recital of facts would suffice. On 3rd December, 2011, an Agreement was executed between the petitioner and the respondent, whereunder the petitioner was required to supply Sandwich Bus Ducts to the respondent.
3. Article 15.3.1 of the Agreement dated 3 December, 2011, provided for resolution of the disputes by arbitrator, which read thus:
"15.3.1 All disputes shall be resolved through Arbitration. The appointment of a sole arbitrator to be selected by the Supplier/Manufacturer out of the names 3 such notable persons to be given by "JOP" within a peri
Strict enforcement of arbitration agreement and the law does not permit either party to act as an arbitrator or appoint the arbitrator to arbitrate on the disputes.
A sole arbitrator can be appointed by a party if the opposing party defaults on arbitrator appointment, per arbitration clause and judicial precedent.
The appointment of the arbitrator must be in accordance with the arbitration agreement and must satisfy the provisions of the arbitration act.
The unilateral appointment of an arbitrator without engaging the other party and the applicability of statutory provisions and legal precedents in determining the legitimacy of the appointment.
The court ruled that unilateral appointment of an arbitrator is invalid under the Arbitration Act, as it circumvents the procedure agreed upon in the arbitration agreement.
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator is contrary to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, necessitating mutual agreement for such appointment.
The right to appoint an arbitrator is not forfeited by serving notice for appointment; jurisdictional interventions can temporarily affect appointment rights, and the court's role is to ensure compli....
A party's right to appoint an arbitrator can be forfeited if they fail to do so within the agreed timeframe as per the arbitration agreement.
The court has the authority to appoint an arbitrator on behalf of a party if the other party fails to appoint its arbitrator within the specified period, as per the arbitration clause in the agreemen....
An arbitrator cannot be unilaterally appointed in violation of Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; such an appointment is unsustainable.
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
