Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Oyo Workspaces India Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
Nagabhushan C.R. - Respondent
Arb.P. 463 of 2021
Decided On : 23-08-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner served notice; respondent absent. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. court's analysis on absence of opposition. (Para 5 , 11) |
| 3. appointment of arbitrator sought under arbitration act. (Para 6 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. dispute referred to delhi international arbitration centre. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. final disposal of petition stated. (Para 15) |
(Video-Conferencing)
1. Notice on this petition was issued on 8th April, 2021. Service thereon has been effected on the respondent.
2. The Registry was directed to contact the respondent telephonically as well as by WhatsApp and intimate the respondent of today's hearing.
3. The office noting by the Registry indicates that it has been done. There is, however, no appearance on behalf of the respondent either at first call or on second call.
4. It appears that the respondent is not interested in opposing the petition.
5. I have, accordingly, heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and proceed to dispose of the matter.
6. The petition, filed under Section 11 (5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeks appointment of an arbitrator to arbitrate on the dispute between the parties.
7. The substratum of the disputes stands set out in paras 5 to 14 of the petition.
8. The arbitration clause, in the agreement between the parties, reads thus:
"Governing Law and Dispute Resolution
Governed by Indian law. Disputes shall be resolved by arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 at New Delhi only."
9. Notice, invoking arbitration, was sent by the petitioner to the respondent on 5th November, 2020.
10. There is, however, no response thereto from the respondent.
11. No case, for refusing the prayer, of the petitioner, to refer the dispute between the parties to arbitration, is made out.
12. Accordingly, the dispute is referred to the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) to appoint an arbitrator to arbitrate thereon.
13. The arbitration shall take place under the aegis of the DIAC and as per its rules and regulations.
14. The arbitrator appointed by the DIAC shall also be entitled to charge fees in accordance with the schedule of fees maintained by DIAC or as otherwise fixed by the arbitrator in consultation with the parties.
15. This petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
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.
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 has jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, when amicable resolution of disputes fails.
Parties consented to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, allowing referral to an arbitrator for dispute resolution, emphasizing procedural efficiency.
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.
An allegation of frivolity does not preclude the court from referring a dispute to arbitration when an arbitration agreement exists between the parties.
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
