Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PRATEEK JALAN
KTC India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Randhir Brar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks arbitration appointment. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. disputes led to arbitration invocation. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. definition of international commercial arbitration debated. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. interpretation of ‘association of individuals’ clarified. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. shareholders viewed as individual entities. (Para 16 , 17 , 19 , 20) |
| 6. lack of joint enterprise negated association. (Para 18 , 21) |
| 7. jurisdiction limitation due to international criteria. (Para 22) |
| 8. petition dismissed with liberty for further legal remedies. (Para 23) |
JUDGMENT :
PRATEEK JALAN, J.
1. By way of this petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [“the Act”], the petitioner seeks appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate disputes between the parties under a “Shareholders Agreement” dated 20.07.2018 [“the Agreement”].
2. A preliminary question arises as to whether the petition is maintainable in this Court, in view of the fact that one of the parties to the Agreement – Mr. Nicholas Valladares (arrayed as respondent No. 5 in the petition), is admittedly not a national or habitual resident of India. The question depends upon whether the proposed arbitratio
The presence of a party not residing in India renders the arbitration international, irrespective of other parties acting independently, and mandates jurisdiction lies with the Chief Justice of India....
Under Section 11(6-A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the referral court's jurisdiction is strictly limited to prima facie examining the existence of an arbitration agreement. All subs....
Delhi High Court has no jurisdiction to appoint an Arbitrator in an International Commercial Arbitration.
A non-signatory to an arbitration agreement cannot invoke the arbitration clause of the agreement to which it is not a party.
Court has limited jurisdiction under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The court confirmed that the existence of an arbitration agreement is undisputed, and any claims regarding time-bar should be determined by the arbitral tribunal.
The existence of an arbitration agreement under Section 11(6) allows for disputes related to a memorandum of family settlement to be arbitrable, reinforcing the principle of kompetenz-kompetenz.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity and enforceability of the arbitration agreement, the arbitrability of the disputes, and the jurisdiction of the court to appoint an ar....
The existence of an arbitrable dispute, the validity of the arbitration agreement, and the existence of an arbitrable dispute are to be determined by the arbitral tribunal.
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
