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

DELHI HIGH COURT
SANJEEV NARULA
Surya Processors Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Shree Jai Gurudev Textile Agencies – Respondent


Table of Content
1. appointment of arbitral tribunal sought. (Para 1)
2. arguments on existence of arbitration agreement. (Para 2 , 3 , 4)
3. court's analysis on arbitration agreement validity. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11)
4. decision to allow petition and appoint arbitrator. (Para 12 , 15)
5. final conclusion and order of proceeding. (Para 13 , 14 , 16)

JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Narula, J. (Oral)--The present petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [hereinafter "the Act"] seeks appointment of an Arbitral Tribunal for adjudication of disputes relating to invoices issued by the Petitioner - Surya Processors Pvt. Ltd. [hereinafter "SPPL"] in the course of their dealings with Respondent - M/s. Shree Jai Gurudev Textile Agencies [hereinafter "SJGTA"].

2. SJGTA does not dispute the invoices, however, they contend that the instant petition is not maintainable as there is no arbitration agreement between the parties.

3. Ms. Tanishq Mehta, counsel for SJGTA argues that the arbitration agreement relied upon by SPPL does not fulfil the requirements of Section 7(4)(a) of the Act. A mere mention of `arbitration' in an invoice does not translate into existence of a

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top