Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
K. Construction Company - Appellant
Versus
Govt. of NCT of Delhi - Respondent
Arb.P. 437 of 2021
Decided On : 18-08-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for arbitration under section 11. (Para 1) |
| 2. respondents agree to arbitration. (Para 2) |
| 3. overview and consensus for arbitration process. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. referral for arbitration with related procedures. (Para 5) |
| 5. disposal of the petition. (Para 6) |
(Video-Conferencing)
1. This is a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("the 1996 Act"), for reference of the dispute between the parties to arbitration.
2. Mr. Archit Krishna, learned Counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents have no objection to the disputes being referred to arbitration.
3. It is not necessary, in the circumstances, to burden this order with the recital of the facts of the case. Suffice it to state that the substratum of the facts, relating to the disputes between the parties, stand set out in exhaustive detail in the petition.
4. Learned Counsel for the parties are agreeable to the matter being referred to the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC), which could appoint a suitable arbitrator to arbitrate thereon.
5. Leaving all questions of facts and law open including the question of arbitratibility of the claim, limitation and all other issues, and without expressing any opinion on the legitimacy of the petitioner's claims or the right of the respondents to object thereto, the disputes stand referred to arbitration under the aegis of the DIAC. The arbitrator shall submit the requisite disclosure under Section 12(2) of the 1996 Act within a week of entering on reference. The arbitration would be conducted as per the rules and regulations of the DIAC and the arbitrator would be entitled to fees as per the schedule of fees maintained by the DIAC or as otherwise agreed in consultation with the parties.
6. The petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.
Consent of both parties allows for disputes to be referred to arbitration, reserving all legal questions related to arbitrability and claims for later determination.
An allegation of frivolity does not preclude the court from referring a dispute to arbitration when an arbitration agreement exists between the parties.
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....
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....
Parties consented to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, allowing referral to an arbitrator for dispute resolution, emphasizing procedural efficiency.
The court affirmed the enforceability of arbitration agreements and the necessity to refer disputes for arbitration according to the agreed terms.
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 existence of an arbitration agreement was confirmed, and the dispute was referred to the Delhi International Arbitration Centre for resolution.
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
