Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
Medela India Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Walnut Corporation – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition for arbitration filing. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. clause of dispute resolution. (Para 3) |
| 3. payment defaults leading to arbitration. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 4. admission of arbitration agreement by respondent. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. objection regarding jurisdiction. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. counterarguments concerning jurisdiction. (Para 12 , 13 , 15) |
| 7. court's analysis on jurisdiction issue. (Para 14 , 17 , 18) |
| 8. petition's maintainability confirmed. (Para 19) |
| 9. appointment of sole arbitrator ordered. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
JUDGMENT
(Judgment released on 20.04.2022)
1. By way of the present petition filed under section 11(6) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 (A&C Act), the petitioner M/s Medela India Private Limited seeks appointment of an arbitrator for adjudication of disputes that are alleged to have arisen with the respondent M/s Walnut Corporation from Distribution Agreement dated 20.04.2018.
2. Notice in this petition was issued on 06.10.2021; whereupon reply dated 15.12.2021 was filed by the respondent.
3. Ms. Richa Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, has drawn the attention of this court to clause 20.5 of the Distribution Agreement, whic
The court emphasized that the clear jurisdiction clause within the arbitration agreement led to habitual jurisdiction in the appointed court, regardless of other locations of execution.
The choice of venue in an arbitration agreement can determine the seat of arbitration, and the amendments made to Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in 2019 are applicable to p....
Unilateral appointment of arbitrators is impermissible under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, ensuring independence and impartiality in arbitrator selection.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of the court's jurisdiction to entertain a petition seeking the appointment of an arbitrator, based on the definitions of 'court'....
The court emphasized that the jurisdiction for the petitions lay in Delhi, and the respondent's unilateral appointment procedure for arbitrators was impermissible under the law.
The main legal principle established in the judgment is that the court at the seat of arbitration has exclusive jurisdiction over all applications under Part I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the designation of the seat of arbitration confers exclusive jurisdiction on the courts at that seat, influencing the court's decision on juri....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of the seat of arbitration in conferring jurisdiction on Courts in arbitration proceedings.
Designation of the seat of arbitration must be clearly expressed; conflicting jurisdiction clauses require a harmonious construction favoring the overarching agreement.
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
