Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SANJEEV NARULA
Prime Interglobe Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Super Milk Products Private Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. interpretation of sections 25(a) and 32 of the arbitration act. (Para 9 , 10 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 16) |
| 2. appointment of a substitute arbitrator to resolve disputes. (Para 21 , 22 , 24) |
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral)
I.A. No. 3810/2021 (seeking condonation of delay of 564 days in filing the present accompanying petition)
1. In light of the relaxation of limitation granted through several orders of the Supreme Court vide Suo Moto W.P. (C) 3/2020, Re: Cognizance for extension of limitation, and also for the grounds and reasons stated in the application, the delay of 564 days in filing the present petition, is condoned and the application is allowed.
2. The application stands disposed of.
O.M.P. (T) (COMM.) 31/2021
3. The Petitioner/counter-claimant could not file its counter-claims within the prescribed time during the course of the arbitral proceedings before the Sole Arbitrator - Hon'ble Ms. Justice Pratibha Rani (Retd.), former Judge of this Court, who was unilaterally appointed by the Respondent. With the Respondent deciding not to pursue its claims and inability of Petitioner to raise any counter-claim(s), the Arbitrator terminated the proceedings. In this
The unilateral appointment of an Arbitrator is invalid, and parties retain the right to seek an independent substitute Arbitrator for unresolved counter-claims following termination of arbitral proce....
An order terminating arbitral proceedings under Section 32(2)(c) of the A&C Act is not an award and can be challenged under Section 14(2) of the A&C Act. Delay in appointing an arbitrator may warrant....
The court affirmed that termination of arbitral proceedings does not permit the appointment of a substitute arbitrator without reviving prior termination, emphasizing procedural adherence in arbitrat....
The court emphasized that an elaborate enquiry into the maintainability of the claims sought to be agitated by the petitioner is not appropriate at the stage of proceedings under Section 11 of the Ac....
An order terminating the arbitral proceedings under Section 32(2)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is not equivalent to an arbitral award and cannot be challenged under Section 34 of....
No power has been invested by Parliament in the Court to remand the matter to the Arbitral Tribunal except to adjourn the proceedings for the limited purpose mentioned in sub-section (4) of Section 3....
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
