Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
C.HARI SHANKAR
Altrade Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
VA Tech Ventures Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. respondent's non-appearance in court. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. jurisdiction and basis for arbitration. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. existence of arbitrable dispute. (Para 5) |
| 4. referencing to diac for arbitrator appointment. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 5. disposal of petition and arbitration proceeding. (Para 8 , 9) |
(Video-Conferencing)
C. Hari Shankar, J.
ARB.P. 203/2021
1. Despite the fact that notice was accepted on behalf of the respondent by Counsel on 26th March, 2021, there has been no appearance on behalf of the respondent either on the last date of hearing or today.
2. The Court has heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and proceeds to dispose of the petition.
3. This petition, preferred under Section 11(5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("1996 Act"), seeks appointment of an arbitrator, in accordance with Clause 45 of the Office Service Agreement dated 18th September, 2019 between the parties read with the Addendum thereto dated 20th November, 2019. The substratum of the dispute is set out in paras 6 to 20 of the petition. The petition further states that attempts at amicable resolution of the disputes failed, whereafter the petitioner has invoked
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.
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....
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 appointed an arbitrator to resolve disputes as per the arbitration clause in the agreement, emphasizing that the parties are bound to arbitrate their disagreements.
The court affirms the validity of the arbitration agreement and appoints an arbitrator as the parties consented to resolve disputes via arbitration.
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.
The court referred disputes between the parties to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act without addressing merits, emphasizing procedural adherence and open questions for the arbitr....
The court affirmed the enforceability of arbitration agreements and the necessity to refer disputes for arbitration according to the agreed terms.
The court's authority to appoint a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
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
