Back
M. SUNDAR
J. Vivek – Appellant
Versus
Big Laundry Services Private Ltd. , Represented by Kumaraguru Seshadri, Director, Kanchipuram – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer; Arbitration Original Petition filed under Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 praying to appoint Mrs.R.J.Radhika, Advocate, High Court, Madras as sole arbitrator on behalf of the parties to resolve the dispute in terms of the Franchise Agreement dated 25.02.2019 between the petitioner and the respondents.)
1. This order will now dispose of the captioned matter.
2. This order has to be read in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier proceedings made in the previous listing on 24.08.2022, which reads as follows:
'Captioned 'Arbitration Original Petition' [hereinafter 'Arb OP' for the sake of convenience and clarity] has been presented in this Court on 10.08.2022 under Section 11(5) of 'The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act No.26 of 1996)' [hereinafter referred to as 'A and C Act' for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity] with a prayer for appointment of sole Arbitrator.
2. Mr.Vigneshwar Elango, learned counsel on record for two petitioners submits that the captioned Arb OP is predicated on clause 14.2 in an 'agreement captioned 'FRANCHISE AGREEMENT' and dated 25.02.2019' [hereinafter 'primary contract' for
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to appoint a sole arbitrator based on the existence of an arbitration agreement, in accordance with the statutory provisions ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the narrow scope of examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and th....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the statutory perimeter under Section 11(6A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, confines the examination of the existence of an ar....
The main legal point established is the court's adherence to the narrow examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement under Section 11(6A) and the emphasis on expeditious disposal of Secti....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the conclusive decision on the limitation plea and the importance of expeditious disposal of arbitration matters.
The Court's decision was influenced by the narrow interpretation of Section 11(6A) of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as discussed in the Mayavati Trading case law and Duro Felguera princ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of a legal drill under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the expeditious disposal of petitions under ....
The Court has the authority to downsize the number of members of an Arbitral Tribunal in a Section 11 legal drill based on the nature of arbitrable disputes and other determinants.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the narrow interpretation of Section 11(6) and the legislative policy to minimize court intervention in appointing arbitrators.
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
