Back
G. GIRISH
Groupl Services Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sunil Vsudevan – Respondent
ORDER :
G.GIRISH, J.
This petition is filed under Section 14(2) read with Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short ‘the Act’) with a prayer for the termination of the mandate of the 1st respondent, who is the sole Arbitrator appointed in the dispute between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent, and to substitute an independent and impartial Arbitrator in that place.
2. The petitioner is a company registered under the Companies Act, 2013. The 2nd respondent is a Government of Kerala undertaking and a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956. On 24.11.2014, an agreement was executed in between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent as per which the petitioner was to set up a Centre of Excellence In Security Sector (CEIS) and to commence its operation with an objective to provide employability skills to the personnel in the security sector. As per the above agreement, the petitioner is said to have commenced the work to establish the proposed CEIS. While so, differences of opinion arose between the petitioner and the 2nd respondent which eventually led in the issuance of a termination notice by the 2nd respondent to the petitioner on 03.05.2019 deman
An arbitrator appointed by a party with vested interests is legally invalid under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
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....
Arbitrators must be impartial and capable of performing their duties; prolonged inaction in arbitration proceedings justifies termination of their mandate.
Point of Law : It is not open for the petitioner to challenge the learned Arbitrator on the ground that there are justifiable doubts as to his independence and impartiality in terms of the Guidelines....
The court emphasized the necessity for impartiality in arbitration, ruling that automatic appointments of arbitrators undermined the arbitration clause, rendering the award invalid.
Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator by a party with vested interests breaches principles of fairness and impartiality, rendering such appointment invalid under arbitration laws.
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
