Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
VIBHU BAKHRU
Cement Corporation of India – Appellant
Versus
Promac Engineering Industries Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to arbitral tribunal's fee orders (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. scope of section 9 of the a&c act (Para 3 , 6) |
| 3. previous petition dismissals affect current claims (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. dismissal of petition with reserved rights (Para 7 , 8) |
JUDGMENT
Vibhu Bakhru, J. (Oral)
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the `A&C Act'), inter alia, praying as under:
"a) set aside the impugned order dated 17.12.2018 and 24.08.2021, in the interest of justice;
b) Declare Petitioner's calculation for Rs. 15,00,000/- as an arbitration fees payable to each of the arbitrators as just and correct calculation in terms of Schedule IV of the Act;"
2. The orders impugned by the petitioner (that are, orders dated 17.12.2018 and 24.08.2021) are procedural orders passed by the Arbitral Tribunal fixing the fee payable by the parties. The petitioner's grievance is that the Arbitral Tribunal has fixed a separate fee for counter-claims, which according to the petitioner, is not permissible as the total fee payable thereafter, would exceed the maximum fee fixed under Schedule IV of the A&C Act.
3. It is at once clea
The court held that challenges to procedural orders of an arbitral tribunal regarding fees do not fall within the scope of interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Procedural orders by an Arbitral Tribunal regarding fees are not subject to challenge under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The main legal point established is that Section 9 of the A&C Act empowers the Court to grant interim measures and does not encompass challenges to procedural orders regarding arbitration fees.
The residuary clause of Section 9(1)(ii) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not cover orders passed by the Tribunal concerning the calculation of fee based on the interpretation of th....
The court clarified that the residuary clause in Section 9(1)(ii)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act does not permit intervention for issues pertaining to fee calculation by the Tribunal.
The Court upheld the Arbitral Tribunal's decision to award foreclosure compensation and reject the counterclaim, finding that the Tribunal's interpretation of the contract was within its jurisdiction....
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
