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.
MS Promax Power Ltd. - Appellant
Versus
MS Tahal Consulting Engineers India Pvt. Ltd. - Respondent
Arb.P. 493 of 2022& I.A 6530 of 2022
Decided On : 28-04-2022




The court facilitates arbitration referral based on mutual consent of the parties, adhering to the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Headnote:(A) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Reference to arbitration - Dispute referenced to arbitration based on sub-contract agreement dated 27.01.2021 - Consent of both parties acknowledged for arbitration referral. (Paras 1, 4, 7)

(B) Arbitration procedure - Appointment of arbitrator and regulation of fees as per Fourth Schedule under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. (Paras 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought arbitration for disputes arising from a sub-contract agreement, while the respondent had initiated arbitration procedurally via a notice. Both parties agreed, without prejudice to positions, to refer the matter to arbitration.

Findings of Court:
The court appointed a former judge as sole arbitrator to handle the arbitration process.

Issues: Whether the dispute should proceed to arbitration given the prior invocation by the respondent and the subsequent consent by both parties.

Ratio Decidendi: The court concluded that with mutual consent, the dispute merits referral to arbitration, ensuring compliance with applicable procedural statutes.

Result: Petition disposed of, and arbitration referred.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's request for arbitration reference. (Para 1)
2. responses and consent to refer matters to arbitration. (Para 2 , 3)
3. appointment of arbitrator and procedural details. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
4. disposal of petition based on agreements. (Para 7)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. Petitioner seeks reference of dispute to arbitration in terms of sub-contract agreement dated 27.01.2021.

2. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel for respondent.

3. Learned counsel for respondent submits that petitioner has not invoked arbitration but respondent had invoked arbitration vide notice dated 16.04.2022. However, without prejudice to their respective stands, learned counsel for parties pray that the dispute be referred to arbitration.

4. In view of the above and with the consent of the parties and without prejudice to their rights and contentions, Mr. G.P. Mittal, former Judge of this Court (Mobile # +91 99103 84619; email: gpmittal@gmail.com) is appointed as the sole Arbitrator. The Arbitral tribunal shall entertain the claims and counter claims, if any, of the parties.

5. The fees of the learned Arbitrator shall be as per the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

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