Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SUNITA AGARWAL
KEC International Limited – Appellant
Versus
Western Railay – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This is a petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, “the Act’ 1996”) seeking for appointment of arbitrator in view of the arbitration clause as part of the EPC (Engineering, Procurement and Construction) Agreement dated 31.05.2021 executed between the Consortium of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 and the President of India acting through the Chief Project Director, read with the Subsidiary Agreement dated 09.05.2023 executed between the consortium of petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 and the respondent No.2 herein namely the Chief Project Director, Railway Electrification, Central Organization for Railway Electrification (CORE), having its Principal office at Ahmedabad, Gujarat.
2. The submission is that pursuant to the execution of the EPC Agreement, the supervision and overall management of the project work was entrusted to and the project work was being carried out under the supervision and control of CORE. However, during the execution of the work and vide Railway Board’s Office Memorandum dated 11.09.2023, the Ministry of Railways, Government of India has decided to close the operations of CORE and transfer all of CORE’s ongoing pro
The arbitration clause must ensure independence and impartiality, and any clause favoring one party unduly is non-compliant with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
An employee of the respondent or even a retired employee would be ineligible to be appointed as an arbitrator. The panel of arbitrators should be broad-based and should include persons with diverse b....
An arbitration clause mandating appointment from a biased source is invalid; courts can appoint an independent arbitrator to ensure impartiality.
The appointment procedure prescribed in clause 3.37 of the RFP was found to be restrictive and not broad-based, impinging upon the validity of the appointment procedure. The 'counter balancing' as co....
Disqualified arbitrators cannot appoint successors; unilateral requests do not waive statutory disqualifications under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Point of law: As per the legal position settled by the Supreme Court in catena of judgments, the High Court has the jurisdiction under Section 11(6) of the said Act to nullify the appointments made b....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the procedure for appointment of Arbitral Tribunal as prescribed in the General Conditions of Contract was void and contrary to the scheme of ....
Arbitrator independence is crucial; unilateral appointments violate neutrality, invalidating any waiver of ineligibility not expressly agreed post-constitution of the 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
