Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Prem Lal Singh Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Delhi Development Authority – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for appointment of arbitrator under arbitration act. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court's observations on appointment of arbitrator. (Para 4) |
| 3. appointment of arbitrator and compliance with law. (Para 5) |
| 4. conclusion and order for arbitration proceedings. (Para 6 , 8 , 9) |
1. For adjudication of disputes with respondent, petitioner has filed the present petition under the provisions of Section 11of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of sole Arbitrator.
2. Pertinently, the case of the petitioner rests upon Agreement No. 10/EE/WD-13/DDA/11-12 dated 01-06-2011 entered with respondent for work "Maintenance of various colonies under Dwarka Zone Nazul Account II SH: Repair of interlocking paver blocks, providing fixing RCC slab manhole covers and cleaning desilting of drain along 30.00 mtr. wide R/W at Sector 23 Dwarka" for an estimated Cost Rs.6,01,409/- and tendered cost Rs.3,99,919/-, awarded on 31.05.2011, to be completed within a month.
3. According the petitioner, the aforesaid work was completed on 31.10.2011 within the stipulated period of one month, against which petitioner had raised bills. However, certain dispu
The court sanctioned the appointment of an Arbitrator despite procedural violations, highlighting the importance of adherence to statutory provisions while respecting the parties' agreements.
Appointment of a sole arbitrator must comply with the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and should not be in violation of relevant legal precedents.
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.
A party cannot unilaterally appoint an Arbitrator as it undermines unbiased dispute resolution; a collective agreement for a sole Arbitrator is essential.
No single party can be permitted to unilaterally appoint the Arbitrator, as it would defeat the purpose of unbiased adjudication of dispute between parties.
Court has the discretion to appoint a new Arbitrator to continue unresolved arbitration proceedings, affirming continuity even after the previous Arbitrator's death.
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator is impermissible; parties must appoint an arbitrator jointly or seek court appointment to ensure unbiased dispute resolution.
The court's authority to appoint an arbitrator in cases where the parties are unable to agree, in accordance with the law laid down by the Supreme Court and the provisions of the Arbitration & Concil....
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....
Arbitrator shall ensure compliance of Section 12 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before commencing the arbitration.
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
