Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Ashutosh Builders Contractors and Engineers – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of the case and contractual agreements. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 10) |
| 2. request for arbitration initiation. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 3. court's reasoning on arbitrator appointment. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 4. appointment of arbitrator and order conclusion. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
1. Petitioner has filed the present petition under the provisions of Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of sole arbitrator for adjudication of all the disputes with respondents in terms of arbitration clause 70 of IAFW 2249.
2. Petitioner is a contractor and has been engaged by the respondent on several occasions for carrying out various constructions and other activities of respondent. Respondent is an establishment fully controlled and supervised by the Ministry of Defence, Union of India and is a state under Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Respondent no.1 is Union of India through Engineer in Chief (E-IN-C) of the Wing of Army for carrying out works of infrastructure. Respondent nos.2, 3 & 4 are subordinate offices to respondent no.1.
3. Petitioner was awarded the acceptance letter of the contract agreem
No party can unilaterally appoint an arbitrator; appointment requires either mutual consent or judicial appointment to ensure impartiality.
The unilateral appointment of an arbitrator violates the principle of unbiased adjudication, requiring mutual agreement between parties for such appointments.
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....
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....
The court affirmed that arbitration proceedings should be initiated to resolve disputes, even if a no-claim certificate is invoked, unless the claims are manifestly devoid of merit.
The main legal point established is the necessity of appointing an independent arbitrator to resolve disputes, in accordance with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and rele....
The court's decision emphasized the arbitrability of disputes and the appointment of a sole arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Unilateral appointment of an Arbitrator by one party is void under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, reinforcing the need for impartial adjudication by the court.
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....
: Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator defeats unbiased adjudication; when an arbitration clause does not provide for a panel of arbitrators, the task of appointing an arbitrator devolves on the C....
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
