SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Caparo Financial Solutions Limited – Appellant
Versus
Jem and Associates – Respondent


Table of Content
1. grounds for objection to arbitrator. (Para 1 , 2)
2. parties consent to substitute arbitrator. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's appointment of substitute arbitrator. (Para 5 , 6)
4. petition disposed with directions. (Para 7 , 8)

ORDER (Oral)

(Video-Conferencing)

1. Consequent to an objection having been raised by the respondent, regarding the appointment of Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.K. Modi, a retired Judge of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, as the arbitrator to arbitrate on the disputes between the petitioner and the respondent, premised on Section 12(5) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1996 Act") read with the Seventh Schedule thereto and the judgment of the Supreme Court in Perkins Eastman Architects DPC v. HSCC (India) Ltd., 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1517: the learned arbitrator recused from the proceedings.

2. This provoked the petitioner to file the present petition before this Court, seeking appointment of a substitute arbitrator.

3. Mr. Ram, learned Counsel for the respondent has, on instructions, submitted that his client has no objection to the appointment of Hon'ble Mr. Justice N. K. Modi as the substitute arbitrator by th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top