Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Raymond Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Pret Study By Janak Fashions Private Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. existence of a dispute requiring arbitration. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. referral of dispute to arbitration under diac. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. petition allowed; arbitration proceedings confirmed. (Para 7) |
ORDER
(Video-Conferencing)
1. This petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (`the 1996 Act') for appointment of an arbitrator to arbitrate on the disputes between the parties.
2. Inasmuch as Ms. Vanika Gupta, learned Counsel for the respondent does not oppose the request for appointment of an arbitrator, it is not necessary to distil, here, the details of the dispute. Suffice it to state that the dispute stands set out in sub-paras (ii) to (xxii) of the petition. The arbitration clause, in the "second agreement" dated 10th June, 2017 between the parties, reads as under:
"ARBITRATION
All claims, disputes or differences between the LICENSOR and LICENSEE arising from or in relation to and/or connected with this Agreement and/or concerning the license or the said Premises shall be settled amicably between the Parties. However, in case the dispute is not settled amicably, the matter shall be referred to Arbitrator and the Arbitration proceeding
The court directed the appointment of an arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, reaffirming the binding nature of the arbitration clause within the parties' agreement.
Parties consented to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, allowing referral to an arbitrator for dispute resolution, emphasizing procedural efficiency.
A court, under sections 11(5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, is obligated to appoint an arbitrator when a valid arbitration clause exists and the other party does not oppose the pet....
Consent of both parties allows for disputes to be referred to arbitration, reserving all legal questions related to arbitrability and claims for later determination.
The court appointed an arbitrator to resolve disputes as per the arbitration clause in the agreement, emphasizing that the parties are bound to arbitrate their disagreements.
Appointment of an arbitrator in instances where the respondent does not object to arbitration is valid under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing the importance of efficient dispute reso....
The court has jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, when amicable resolution of disputes fails.
The existence of an arbitration agreement was confirmed, and the dispute was referred to the Delhi International Arbitration Centre for resolution.
The court affirmed the enforceability of arbitration agreements and the necessity to refer disputes for arbitration according to the agreed terms.
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
