MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA
Vimlesh Baregama S/o Shri Khyali Lal Brregama – Appellant
Versus
Manglam Cement Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER :
Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, C.J.
1. Applicant has preferred an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1996’) for appointment of sole arbitrator for adjudication of the dispute, which is said to have arisen between the applicant and non-applicant with reference to appointment letter dated 16.07.2012.
2. The applicant claims that he was initially appointed with the respondent on the post of Assistant in purchase department vide appointment letter dated 16.07.2012. In the application, it has been stated that one of the condition in the appointment letter was that all the disputes regarding the service of the applicant will be referred to the arbitrator for adjudication. Pursuant to a departmental enquiry initiated vide charge-sheet dated 18.03.2020 by the respondent against the applicant, the applicant was dismissed from service vide order dated 20.08.2020. On representation made to the Collector, dispute was referred to the Joint Labour Commissioner, who vide order dated 11.09.2020 closed the case stating that it lacked the jurisdiction. Finally a notice was given to the respondent by invoking arbitra
Union of India v. Master Construction Co. (2011) 12 SCC 349
BSNL v. Nortel Networks (India) (P) Ltd. (2021) 5 SCC 738
Duro Felguera, SA Versus Gangavaram Port Ltd.
Indian Oil Corporation Limited Versus NCC Limited
Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. NCC Ltd (2023) 2 SCC 539
Magic Eye Developers Private Limited Versus M/s. Green Edge Infrastructure Private Limited & Others
Mayavati Trading (P) Ltd. Versus Pradyuat Deb Burman (2019) 8 SCC 714
National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Boghara Polyfab (P) Ltd (2009) 1 SCC 267
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Genus Power Infrastructure Ltd. (2015) 2 SCC 424
NTPC Limited Versus SPML Infra Limited
Pravin Electricals (P). Ltd. v. Galaxy Infra and Engg. (P). Ltd. (2021) 5 SCC 671
Sanjiv Prakash v. Seema Kukreja (2021) 9 SCC 732
SBP & Co. Versus Patel Engg. Ltd. (2005) 8 SCC 618
Secunderabad Cantonment Board v. B. Ramachandraiah & Sons (2021) 5 SCC 705
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Antique Art Exports (P) Ltd. (2019) 5 SCC 362
The court reaffirmed that the existence of an arbitration agreement must be established, and disputes should generally be referred to arbitration unless clearly non-arbitrable.
(1) Invocation of arbitration – Execution of discharge voucher – There is no rule of absolute kind which precludes arbitration in cases where a full and final settlement has been arrived at.(2) Invoc....
The main legal principle established is the limited scope of the referral Court's jurisdiction under Section 11(6) of the Act, emphasizing the Court's role in conducting a prima facie examination of ....
The court held that its review under Section 11(6) is limited to confirming the existence of an arbitration agreement, without delving into substantive disputes, which is for the Arbitrator to decide....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.