Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Vibhu Bakhru, J.
Cravants Media Private Limited - Appellant
Versus
Jharkhand State Co-operative Milk Producers Federation Ltd. - Respondent
Arb.P. 915 of 2021
Decided On : 06-12-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties' agreement includes arbitration clauses (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. dispute over jurisdiction based on arbitration location (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. distinction between venue and seat of arbitration (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 4. court grants petition and appoints arbitrator (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT
Vibhu Bakhru, J. (Oral)--The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the `A&C Act'), inter alia, praying that an arbitrator be appointed to adjudicate the disputes that have arisen between the parties in connection with the Agreement dated 15.01.2018.
2. Respondent no.1 had floated a tender for availing media services relating to media support. Subsequently, on 28.11.2017, a Work Order [Work Order bearing No. JMF/171/2017] was issued by the respondents in favour of the petitioner and the petitioner was appointed as the media agency to handle the brand buildings, creative developments and creative disseminations for a period of one year with effect from 01.12.2017. Thereafter, on 15.01.2018, the parties entered into a formal agreement captioned `Service Agreement' (hereafter referred to as `the Agreement'). The Agreement includes an Arbitration Clause that reads as under:
"16. Dispute Resolution and Governing Law
16.1 In case of any issue, dispute, controversy or claim between the Parties to the Agreement wherein Parties disagree on the interpretation of the other Party arising out of this Agreement, or any other document or, invalidity or termination Agreement executed in connection with this Agreement including the breach thereof, the issue will be first re referred to the senior management of both the Parties for resolution who shall act as the negotiators/mediators and shall use all reasonable endeavors to negotiate with a view to resolving the dispute amicably. If the issue remains unresolved even after thirty (30) days after reference, the dispute would then be dealt with in accordance with Chaise 16.2.
16.2 The arbitration of any dispute, controversy or charm shall be conducted by a single arbitrator selected by the Parties in accordance with the rules of the Indian Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. The language of the arbitration shall be English. The venue of arbitration shall be Ranchi. The cost of arbitration will be borne by the both Parties as directed by the arbitrator.
16.3 The Parties acknowledge that the immediate remedies at law may be sometimes inadequate, the Parties shall therefore be entitled to seek additional injunctive relief in the event of any material breach of this Agreement.
16.4 All remedies available to other Party under this Agreement are cumulative and may be exercised concurrently or separately, the exercise of any one remedy will not be deemed an election of such remedy to the exclusion of other remedies; and the rights and remedies of the parties as set forth in this Agreement are not exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies available to it at law or in equity.
16.5 This Agreement shall be interpreted and governed by the laws of India without regard to conflict of law provisions and any disputes arising out of this Agreement shall be subject to the sole and exclusive jurisdiction of courts of Delhi."
3. The respondents do not dispute that the parties had entered into the said agreement or that the petitioner had invoked the Arbitration Clause (Clause 16 of the Agreement). However, the respondents have opposed the present petition on the ground that it is not maintainable as this Court does not have the jurisdiction to entertain the present petition.
4. Mr. Gupta, learned counsel appearing for the respondent relies on the decision of the Supreme Court in Bharat Aluminium Company & Ors. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services & Ors., (2012)9 SCC 552, in support of his contention that since the parties had agreed that Ranchi would be the pla
The court affirmed exclusive jurisdiction of Delhi courts for arbitration agreements, despite a designated venue in Ranchi, clarifying venue does not denote seat of arbitration.
The designation of 'venue' in an arbitration clause does not imply the 'seat' of arbitration, which must be expressly specified; exclusive jurisdiction remains with civil courts at the location defin....
Point of law : Seat of Arbitration - What constitutes the ‘seat’ of arbitral proceedings - the intention of the parties is germane and that can be gathered from Contract.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of the seat of arbitration in conferring jurisdiction on Courts in arbitration proceedings.
Point of law: Where any disputes arise between parties in respect of or in connection with the agreement then parties shall first endeavour to conciliate the disputes failing which the same shall be ....
The designation of a location for arbitration proceedings does not establish the seat of arbitration, impacting the court's territorial jurisdiction over related petitions.
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
