Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SURESH KUMAR KAIT
Neptune India Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
New Delhi Municipal Council – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arbitration petition and agreement details (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. dispute over contractual obligations and force majeure (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. agreement on arbitration for dispute resolution (Para 7) |
| 4. appointment and fee of the arbitrator (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. disposition of petition and order details (Para 11 , 12) |
The hearing has been conducted through video conferencing.
1. The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes with respondent.
2. As per the averments made in the present petition, respondent is a state within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India and the respondent advertised a Request for Proposal (RFP) for selection of Concessionaire for Design, Development, Implementation, Operation and Maintenance of Smart Parking Solution for on street, off street and indoor parking spaces in NDMC area on Public Private Partnership (PPP) model.
3. It is further averred that on 10.07.2017, respondent issued letter of acceptance of tender to the petitioner and Agreement No. 01/EE (WS)/SCP/2017-2018 dated 09.08.2017 w
The court established that disputes arising from contractual agreements can be resolved through arbitration when both parties consent, even amid claims of contractual default and force majeure condit....
The main legal principle established is the court's authority to appoint a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to adjudicate disputes between parties wh....
: 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 the course for dispute resolution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of an Arbitrator must comply with the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and the choice of the Arbitrator must not ha....
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator by a party with a vested interest is improper and contradicts established legal principles regarding impartiality in arbitration.
The necessity for mutual agreement in appointing a sole arbitrator is critical to uphold fairness in arbitration processes, emphasizing the exclusivity of choice and impartiality in dispute resolutio....
The arbitration agreement is sacrosanct and must be adhered to without deviation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the Court's authority to appoint an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 based on the arbitration clause in....
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
