Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
TASHI RABSTAN
Meena Kumari W/o Sh. Pawan Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Sainik Cooperative House Society Ltd. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks arbitration appointment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner's argument for independent arbitrator. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's analysis of arbitrator eligibility. (Para 7 , 11 , 12 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. respondents argue against independent arbitrator. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. court's rationale against registrar as arbitrator. (Para 18) |
| 6. appointment of new arbitrator and order conclusion. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
ORDER :
Tashi Rabstan, C.J.
1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of an independent Arbitrator.
2. Brief facts, which lead to the filing of the present petition, are that on 03.10.2005, as per perpetual lease deed, lease hold rights of shop bearing No. GS- 119 measuring 12’ x 15’ situated at Sector G, Sainik Colony, Jammu was allotted in favour of Smt. Vaishno Devi and as per clause (4) of the Lease Deed, arbitration clause has been incorporated, in the event of existence of any dispute. On 10.07.2007, the premium for regularization of excess land of 225 sqft. appurtenant to the shop was received by the respondent No. 1 Society from the lessee. On 19.07.200
The appointment of an arbitrator with potential bias due to their governmental role violates Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, necessitating an independent arbitrator.
An arbitrator's appointment must adhere to the agreed procedure; failure to do so renders the appointment invalid under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of an arbitrator must be in accordance with the agreed procedure in the contract. If the appointment is not in line with the a....
The court established that disputes involving cooperative societies must be resolved in accordance with the provisions of the J&K Cooperative Societies Act, unless the parties have a valid and enforc....
The court established that under the amended Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, an arbitrator must be independent and impartial, and parties cannot appoint an arbitrator if the appointing author....
Once person who was required to arbitrate upon disputes arisen under terms and conditions of contract becomes ineligible by operation of law, he would not be eligible to nominate a person as an arbit....
The court emphasized the necessity for impartiality in arbitration, ruling that automatic appointments of arbitrators undermined the arbitration clause, rendering the award invalid.
The unilateral appointment of a Sole Arbitrator by one party, without proper invocation under the Act, is invalid and constitutes an abuse of the process of law.
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
