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 Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Bhakti Enterprises – Respondent


Table of Content
1. need for appointing a substitute arbitrator due to withdrawal. (Para 1 , 2)
2. respondents’ concerns regarding their right to file a defense. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court's role under section 11(6) of the 1996 act. (Para 5)
4. appointment and re-establishment of arbitration proceedings. (Para 6 , 7)
5. conclusion and disposal of the petition. (Para 8)

ORDER (ORAL)

1. Arbitral proceedings are pending between the parties. They were proceeding before Mr. Ashok Mathur, who had been appointed as an arbitrator by the petitioner vide letter dated 16thth August, 2018. However, during the course of the proceedings, the learned arbitrator withdrew from the proceedings on 26 November, 2020, citing personal difficulties. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court for appointing a substitute arbitrator.

2. It is obvious that as the arbitral proceedings are going on, a substitute arbitrator has to be appointed.

3. Learned counsel, who had appeared for the respondents on the last date of hearing, had submitted that his client would, in all possibility, have no objection to appointment of a substitute arbitrator, as the earlier arbitrator withdrew from

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