Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Oil Industry Development Board – Appellant
Versus
Godrej and Boyce MFG Co. Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. contractual obligations and arbitration clauses. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. reopening arbitration proceedings. (Para 4) |
| 3. agreement to appoint an arbitrator. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. procedures governing arbitration fees and compliance. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11 (4) (a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes with respondent.
2. Petitioner is a statutory body established under the Oil Industry Development Act, 1974. Respondent is company incorporated under the Companies Act. Petitioner claims to have invited bids for interior works (including internal electricals) for ground First, Second and Third Floor of G + 3 Block of the Oil Industry Development Board Office at Plot No.02, Sector 73, Noida. Respondent participated in the said bid and was successful in the same. Subsequently, petitioner vide its letter dated 04.06.2008 accepted the respondent's bid and in furtherance thereof, an Agreement/Contract dated 25.06.2008 was executed between the parties. As per the said Contract, respondent was required to coordinate and consult Engineers India Li
Court has the discretion to appoint a new Arbitrator to continue unresolved arbitration proceedings, affirming continuity even after the previous Arbitrator's death.
The court has the authority to appoint a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 when the parties fail to agree on the appointment.
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 decision emphasized the arbitrability of disputes and the appointment of a sole arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Disputes arising from a construction contract for unpaid dues are arbitrable under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, prompting the appointment of a sole arbitrator.
Court can appoint an arbitrator when both parties consent to arbitration for resolving disputes, even amidst contractual disagreements.
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.
The court affirmed that a party can seek arbitration if the other party fails to appoint an arbitrator and acknowledged the disputes existing between them.
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....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the exclusivity of the right to appoint a sole arbitrator when one party has such a right, as per the dictum of the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
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
