Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
VIBHU BAKHRU
Foodworld – Appellant
Versus
Indian Railway Catering and Tourism Corporation Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background on catering service contract (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. disputes regarding meal tariff reimbursement (Para 7 , 8 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. claims and limitations in arbitration context (Para 12 , 13 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. court's limited examination of arbitration agreements (Para 18 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. examination of disputes for arbitration (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 6. appointment of sole arbitrator (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
JUDGMENT
Vibhu Bakhru, J. (ORAL)--The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter the `A&C Act'), inter alia, praying that a Sole Arbitrator be appointed to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.
2. On 27.05.2013, Northern Railways had issued a Notice Inviting Tender (NIT) for Onboard Catering Services in Train no. 12263-64 (Hazarat Nizamuddin - Pune: Duronto Express). Subsequently, on 09.10.2013 and 23.10.2013, the Railway Board issued two circulars - CC no. 63/2013 and CC no. 67/2013. In terms of Circular no. 63/2013, the Railway Board revised the menu and catering service. In terms of Circular no. 67/2013, the Railway Board directed provision of Regular Meals in pla
The court's jurisdiction under Section 11(6) of the A&C Act is limited to determining the existence of an arbitration agreement, while issues of limitation and other contentious disputes are to be de....
The court affirmed the claimant's entitlement to reimbursement for the Second Regular Meal at the specified rate, rejecting waiver and estoppel claims, while restoring the Arbitral Award.
Parties must adhere to the detailed procedure for appointing an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, before seeking court intervention.
Unilateral appointment of arbitrators is impermissible under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, ensuring independence and impartiality in arbitrator selection.
The court ruled that a notice invoking arbitration is deemed served if dispatched to the correct address, and disputes cannot be dismissed on limitation grounds when evidence suggests ongoing acknowl....
The court emphasized that the jurisdiction for the petitions lay in Delhi, and the respondent's unilateral appointment procedure for arbitrators was impermissible under the law.
The Court's examination under Section 11 of the A&C Act is limited to the existence of an Arbitration Agreement, and contentious issues are to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal.
Scope of judicial review by court while deciding an application under Sections 8 or 11 of Arbitration Act, post amendments by Act 3 of 2016 (with retrospective effect from 23-10-2015) and even post a....
The court affirmed that the claimant must secure the necessary Airport Entry Permits and upheld the arbitration award, ruling no breach by the respondent; consent regarding the arbitrator's appointme....
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
