Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SOUMITRA SAIKIA
NES Digboi Bogapani (177804), A proprietorship concern, represented by its Proprietor, Mrs. Ranjita Dhanowar – Appellant
Versus
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited, Represented by Territory Manager, Retail Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SOUMITRA SAIKIA, J.
Heard Mr. GN Sahewalla, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. M Sahewalla, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S Borthakur, learned counsel and Mr. SS Roy, learned CGC for the respondent.
2. The petitioner before this Court was awarded dealership of Dispensing Pump and Selling License by respondent company by execution of proper agreement dated 28.03.2023. By the said agreement, the petitioner had been running a petrol pump at Tingrai Gaon, Tinsukia since the year 2008. On the basis of a dealership granted to the petitioner by Numaligarh Refinery Limited (hereinafter referred to as “NRL”), the NRL was taken over by BPCL in the year 2012 whereupon a fresh agreement was entered by and between the petitioner and BPCL for running the patrol pump. In the year 2023, there was some persistent malfunctioning in the dispensing unit of the petitioner’s petrol pump. This dispensing unit was installed and maintained by M/S Gilbarco Vedder Root (GVR) which was 3rd Party vendor appointed by the BPCL and who supplied the dispensing unit for the petrol pump. The internal parts of the dispensing units were sent to GVR for testing wherein it was found that
Parties must adhere to agreed arbitration procedures; failure to do so precludes judicial appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Parties must exhaust conciliation procedures before pursuing arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing adherence to specified dispute resolution clauses in contracts.
The existence of a dispute under the dealership agreement justifies the appointment of an arbitrator, even without a termination order being issued.
Where an Arbitrator had already been appointed and intimation thereof had been conveyed to the other party, a separate application for appointment of an Arbitrator is not maintainable. Once the power....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an application filed under Section 11(6)(C) of the Act, 1996 is barred by limitation if filed after a delay of more than the period of three y....
Judicial scrutiny under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act is limited to the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement, with substantive issues reserved for 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
