Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SANJEEV NARULA
Ashiana Infrabuild LLP – Appellant
Versus
S.D. Bhalerao Constructions Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. disputes arise from agreements. (Para 2) |
| 2. parties dispute over arbitration agreements. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's determination of jurisdiction and arbitrability. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. appointment of sole arbitrator to resolve disputes. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
Sanjeev Narula, J.
[VIA VIDEO CONFERENCING]
1. Ashiana Infrabuild LLP-the Petitioner herein - by way of the instant petition under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [hereinafter referred to as `the Act'], seeks appointment of the Arbitral Tribunal for adjudication of the disputes arising out of certain agreements between the parties.
Brief facts:
2. The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of the present petition are as follows:
2.1. The parties herein entered into a Joint Venture Agreement dated 24th March, 2011 [hereinafter referred to as 'JVA'] for the re-development/reconstruction of a residential project in Mumbai.
2.2. As a result of certain issues arising therein, a Cancellation Agreement dated 1st April, 2017 [hereinafter referred to as `CA'] was executed, by virtue whereof, the JV, along with all the rights and obligati
The arbitration clause in the Cancellation Agreement is effective despite the Joint Venture Agreement being claimed as ongoing, allowing the disputes to be arbitrated in Delhi.
The main legal point established is that the terms of a superseding agreement govern the disputes, and the specific arbitration and jurisdiction clauses in an agreement are crucial in determining the....
Disputes related to Joint Venture Agreement must be resolved via arbitration, affirming validity of the arbitration clause despite claims of termination.
The arbitration agreement binds all parties, including non-signatories, and disputes must be referred to arbitration despite objections on limitation and jurisdiction.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of the seat of arbitration in conferring jurisdiction on Courts in arbitration proceedings.
The main legal point established is that the non-competition clause in the Joint Venture Agreement applied only to specific parties and did not extend to all parties involved. Additionally, the court....
Designation of the seat of arbitration must be clearly expressed; conflicting jurisdiction clauses require a harmonious construction favoring the overarching agreement.
The court emphasized that the clear jurisdiction clause within the arbitration agreement led to habitual jurisdiction in the appointed court, regardless of other locations of execution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of the seat of arbitration in determining the territorial jurisdiction under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
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
