Back
ARAVIND KUMAR
Maxxis Rubber India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Tulja Bhavani Engimech Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The petitioner is seeking for appointment of an Arbitrator under this petition which is filed under section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short).
2. The sum and substance or grievance of petitioner as could be gathered from the averments made in petition is to the effect that respondent and petitioner had exchanged into several documents with regard to supply of various products including galvanized iron duct, stainless steel ducting material etc which culminated in purchase agreement being entered into between them. It is also stated that said purchase agreement also contained terms regarding duration of the agreement, date of delivery, terms of payment etc. It is further stated that petitioner had made advance payments against various material supplied by the respondent and respondent had failed to deliver the goods requisitioned by the petitioner and respondent had committed material breach of the purchase agreement and it is not only liable to repay the amount paid by the petitioner by way of advanc
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an exchange of emails and a Purchase Order can constitute a written agreement between parties, satisfying the requirement of a written agreeme....
Disputes arising from defective goods supplied are arbitrable under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, and an arbitrator can be appointed for resolution per the terms of the underlying purchase or....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's power to appoint an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 when no arbitrator has been appointed ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to appoint a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to adjudicate disputes between....
An arbitration agreement can be inferred from the parties' conduct and correspondence, establishing binding intent despite the absence of a signed contract.
The court emphasized the importance of the written arbitration agreement and the designation of venue as the juridical seat of arbitral proceedings.
The court asserted that an Arbitrator must be mutually appointed under contract terms to ensure unbiased resolution of disputes, rejecting unilateral appointments.
The court affirmed the validity of an arbitration agreement and appointed an arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
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
