SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
Indian Oil Corporation Limited - Appellant
Versus
Raaj Unocal Lubricants Limited - Respondent
Arb.P. 288 of 2019
Decided On : 25-04-2022




The court ruled that mutual consent between the parties allows for the appointment of an Arbitral Tribunal under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, with stipulations on fees and disclosures.

Headnote:(A) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 12 - Appointment of Arbitral Tribunal - Petitioner sought appointment of an Arbitral Tribunal per agreement dated 31.01.2000, while respondent acknowledged payment of principal and interest and reserved rights for counter-claims - Disputes referred to DIAC for arbitration under its rules. (Paras 1-6)

(B) Consent for Arbitration - Agreement of parties on dispute resolution allows for appointment of an arbitrator with conditions regarding disclosure and fee structure. (Para 4)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner, Indian Oil Corporation Limited, requested the formation of an Arbitral Tribunal concerning a 2000 agreement, with the respondent, Raaj Unocal Lubricants Limited, consenting to arbitration while acknowledging past payments.

Findings of Court:
In light of the parties' consent, the court ordered the disputes to be arbitrated at the Delhi International Arbitration Centre in compliance with its rules.

Issues: The core issue was the establishment of an Arbitral Tribunal as per the petitioner’s request, with the respondent acknowledging prior payments and counter-claims.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the parties' mutual consent to arbitration justified the formation of the tribunal, subject to disclosing obligations and fee structures as outlined by the DIAC.

Result: Petition disposed of in above terms.

Table of Content
1. request for arbitration based on a prior agreement. (Para 1)
2. respondent acknowledges payments and potential counter-claims. (Para 2 , 3)
3. disputes referred for arbitration with appointed arbitrator. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
4. petition disposed of with terms set for arbitration. (Para 7)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. Petitioner seeks appointment of an Arbitral Tribunal pursuant to agreement dated 31.01.2000.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that petitioner has already been paid the principal amount as also the interest paid by the Excise Department as is noticed in order 23.10.2019.

3. Without prejudice he submits that he has no objection to the Arbitral Tribunal being constituted reserving the right of the respondent to raise counter-claims, in addition to the claims of the petitioner.

4. In view of the above and with the consent of the parties, the disputes are referred to the Delhi International ArbitrationCentre, which would appoint an arbitrator to arbitrate the disputes. The arbitration shall take place under the aegis of the DIAC in accordance with its rules and regulations.

5. The arbitrator would be entitled to charge fees in accordance with the schedule of fee stipulated by the DIAC.

6. The arbitrator shall furnish the requisite disclosure under section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 within two weeks of entering reference.

7. The petition is disposed of in the above terms.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top