Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Amazing India Contractors Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Indian Railway Stations Development Corporation Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for arbitration based on contractual disputes. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. unilateral appointment of arbitrator challenged. (Para 12 , 14) |
| 3. court's reasoning aligns with prior decisions on arbitrator appointment. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 4. court's decision to appoint an arbitrator and dispose of the petition. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
Suresh Kumar Kait, J. (Oral)--The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.
I.A. 12235/2021 (exemption)
1. Allowed subject to all just exceptions.
2. Application is disposed of.
ARB.P. 923/2021 & I.A.12234/2021
3. The present petition has been filed by petitioner seeking appointment of a Sole Arbitrator under the provisions of Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
4. Petitioner, a private limited company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, claims to be involved in the business of Facilities Management and Infrastructure Management Projects throughout India. Respondent is said to be a Special Purpose vehicle and a Joint Venture company of IRCON International Limited, a Government of India Undertaking, under the Ministry of Railways and Rai
The necessity for mutual agreement in appointing a sole arbitrator is critical to uphold fairness in arbitration processes, emphasizing the exclusivity of choice and impartiality in dispute resolutio....
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator by a party with a vested interest is improper and contradicts established legal principles regarding impartiality in arbitration.
: 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 the course for dispute resolution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of an Arbitrator must comply with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and the choice of the Arbitrator must not ha....
Whatever advantage a party may derive by nominating an arbitrator of its choice would get counter balanced by equal power with the other party. But, in a case where only one party has a right to appo....
The Managing Director cannot arbitrarily appoint an arbitrator if their interest affects impartiality; such appointments contravene Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act.
Point of Law : Whatever advantage a party may derive by nominating an arbitrator of its choice would get counter balanced by equal power with the other party. But, in a case where only one party has ....
A party cannot unilaterally appoint an arbitrator when disputes arise, as this infringes on unbiased adjudication rights, affirming established legal principles.
A party with the exclusive right to appoint a sole arbitrator cannot have the other party recommend arbitrators, ensuring impartiality in dispute resolution.
Arbitration - Appointment of Arbitrator - In cases where one party has a right to appoint a sole arbitrator, its choice will always has an element of exclusivity in determining or charting course for....
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
