Back
SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA
Trade Swift Developers Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Gopal Prasad Kanodia – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. An application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Act of 1996') has been filed by the applicant for appointment of an Arbitrator in order to resolve the dispute which has arisen in pursuance to the MoU/agreement of sale entered into between the parties on 19.10.2007 with regard to sale of property situated at revenue village Barodia, station road Tehsil and District, Jaipur bearing Khasra No.330 for the total sale consideration of Rs.50.51 crores.
2. The MoU contained arbitration clause as under:
3. The applicant has stated that they had paid a total advance sum of Rs.6.20 crore to the respondents and despite repeated requests, the respondents failed to hand over title of the property while the applicants are ready and willing to perform their part.
4. It is further stated that vide notice dated 24.10.
The court clarified that post-2015 amendments, its role under Section 11 is limited to verifying the existence of an arbitration agreement, with other issues, including limitation, to be resolved by ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the limitation for filing an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act arises upon the failure to make the appointment of the arbitr....
(1) Period of limitation to file application under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is 3 years’ from date of refusal to appoint Arbitrator, or on expiry of 30 days’, whichever is ....
(1) Limitation Act, 1963 would apply to arbitrations as it applies to proceedings in court.(2) Appointment of Arbitrator – Limitation period for making an application seeking appointment of Arbitrato....
The court's decision was influenced by the application of the prima facie test to determine the time-barred nature of the substantive claim and the justifiability of declining reference to arbitratio....
The referral court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act must determine the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and appoint an arbitrator if satisfied.
The court ruled that issues of limitation and jurisdiction are to be determined by the arbitrator, not by the court at the pre-reference stage under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act....
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....
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
