Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
RBCL Projects Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
BPTP Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dispute pertains to multiple work orders. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. petitioner's invocation of arbitration disputed by respondent. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. uniqueness of arbitrator appointment. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. appointment of arbitrator and disposition of petitions. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.
1. The above captioned petitions have been filed under the provisions of Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
2. Pertinently, the dispute inter se parties pertains to different work orders issued by the respondent to petitioner with regard to different projects.
3. The above captioned first petition [ARB.P. 707/2021] pertains to work order dated 13.12.2016 and 19.01.2017. The second captioned petition [ARB.P. 708/2021] pertains to work order dated 06.04.2015 and the third captioned petition [ARB.P. 711/2021], pertains to work order dated 13.09.2016. According to petitioner, these work orders contain an arbitration clause in the event of dispute between the parties.
4. According to petitioner, after a dispute arose between the parties, , vide notice dated 09.02.2021, petitioner invoked the arbitrat
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator violates impartiality; appointment must comply with arbitration agreements and allow equal rights for both parties.
Arbitrator - Appointment procedure - In cases where one party has a right to appoint a sole arbitrator, its choice will always have an element of exclusivity in determining or charting course for dis....
A party cannot appoint an arbitrator who has an interest in the dispute's outcome, ensuring impartiality in arbitration proceedings.
The unilateral appointment of an arbitrator violates the principle of unbiased adjudication, requiring mutual agreement between parties for such appointments.
The party with the right to appoint a sole arbitrator should not have the power to appoint a sole arbitrator when they have an interest in the outcome of the dispute.
No single party can be permitted to unilaterally appoint the Arbitrator, as it would defeat the purpose of unbiased adjudication of dispute between parties.
Unilateral appointment of arbitrator and ex parte arbitration proceedings are void and can be ignored. Appointment of arbitrator must be based on consensus between the parties or by the court under S....
A party cannot unilaterally appoint an arbitrator when disputes arise, as this infringes on unbiased adjudication rights, affirming established legal principles.
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator violates legal principles under Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, rendering the award non-est.
The court confirmed that consent of both parties for the appointment of an arbitrator fulfills the requirements under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, enabling dispute resolutio....
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
