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

2017 Supreme(Guj) 1822

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
C.L. SONI, J.
Akrata Shipping S.A - Petitioner
Versus
Pipavav Defense And Offshore Engineering Company Limited & 1 - Respondent
Special Civil Application No. 15647 with 15649, 15650 and 15651 Of 2015
Decided On : 19-09-2017

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Rs Sanjanwala, Senior Advocate With Mr. Hardik P Modh With Mr. Amit Laddha With Mr. Vibhor Chaplot, Advocates.
For the Respondent:Mr. Tajas D Karia With Mr. Nirag Pathak With Ms Grishma Ahuja With Mr. Shalin Jani, Advocates For Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co.

Headnote:Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) - Sec. 34 - This petition is filed for seeking relief against an award passed by District Judge in International commercial arbitration out of India - court after perusal of pertaining provisions held that international commercial arbitration out of India does not fall under jurisdiction of part-I of arbitration act - further, court while rejecting award given by District Judge held that sec. 34 of act is not maintainable in this respect.

JUDGMENT :

C.L. SONI, J.

1. The common issue raised in the present petitions is as regards maintainability of the applications being Misc. Civil Application Nos. 15 of 2014 to 18 of 2014 respectively filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (to be referred as 'the Act') by the respondent in the District Court, Amreli.

2. To briefly state, the respondent entered into Shipbuilding Contract on 6.12.2006 with each of the petitioners for designing, building, etc., the 'Vessel' at Pipavav in Gujarat, to deliver and sell the same to each petitioner which the petitioners agreed to purchase and accept the delivery and to pay for the same upon terms and conditions mentioned in the contracts. In the contracts, the respondent is referred as 'Builder' and the petitioner of each petition is referred as 'Buyer'. There appears to be no dispute that the terms, conditions and all clauses in the contracts are similar and therefore, for the sake of convenience, the copy of the contract placed with the first petition shall be looked into. Following was the Arbitration Agreement when the contract was entered between the parties:

"Article XII-Arbitration

1. Decision by the Classification Society:

If any dispute arises between the parties hereto in regard to the design and/or construction of the VESSEL, its machinery and equipment, and/or in respect of the material and/or workmanship thereof and/or thereon, and/or in respect of machinery, equipment and performance, and/or in respect of interpretations of this Contract or the Specifications, the parties may by mutual agreement refer the dispute to the Classification Society or to such other expert as may be mutually agreed between the parties hereto, and whose decision shall be final, conclusive and binding upon the parties hereto.

2. Proceedings of Arbitration:

In the event that the parties hereto do not agree to settle a dispute according to Paragraph 1 of this Article and/or in the event of any other dispute of any kind whatsoever between the parties and relating to this Contract or its cancellation or any stipulation therein, such dispute shall be submitted to arbitration in London under English law. The arbitration shall be conducted in the English language and shall be kept confidential. Each party shall appoint an arbitrator and in the event that they cannot agree, the two arbitrators so appointed shall appoint an Umpire.

If the two arbitrators are unable to agree upon an Umpire within TWENTY (20) days after appointment of the second arbitrator, either of the said two arbitrators may apply to the President or more senior officer for the time being of the London Maritime Arbitrators Association to appoint the third arbitrator, and the three arbitrators shall constitute the board of arbitration.

Such arbitration shall be in accordance with and subject to the provisions of the English Arbitration Act 1996 or any statutory modification or re-enactment thereof for the time being in force and pursuant to the rules then in force of the London Maritime Arbitrators Association.

Either party may demand arbitration of any such dispute by giving notice to the other party. Any demand for arbitration by either of the parties hereto shall state the name of the arbitrator appointed by such party and shall also state specifically the question or questions as to which such party is demanding arbitration.

Within Seventeen (17) days after receipt of such demand for arbitration, the other party shall in turn appoint a second arbitrator and give notice in writing of such appointment to the party demanding arbitration. If a party fails to appoint an arbitrator as aforementioned within Seventeen (17) days following receipt of demand for arbitration by the other party, the party failing to appoint an arbitrator shall be deemed to have accepted and appointed as its own arbitrator, the arbitrator appointed by the party demanding arbitration and the arbitration shall proceed before this sole arbitrator who

































































































































































































































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
whatsapp-icon Back to top