Back
S. S. SUNDAR, N. SENTHILKUMAR
J. Krishnaveni – Appellant
Versus
Same Deutz Fahr India Private Limited – Respondent
ORDER :
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorari to call for records pertaining to the order passed by this Court in Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.)No. 191 of 2023 dated 27.06.2023 in so far as appointing Hon'ble Mr.Justice M.Jaichandran, Former Judge of High Court of Madras as the Sole Arbitrator residing at D.No. 422, South 2nd Main Road, Kapaleeshwar Nagar, Neelankarai, Chennai-600135 and quash the same as the said appointment was made obtained by playing fraud upon this Court.
1. This writ petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order passed by a Learned Single Judge of this Court in Arb.O.P(Com.Div.) No. 191 of 2023 dated 27.06.2023, wherein, Hon'ble Mr.Justice M.Jaichandran, Former Judge of High Court of Madras, was appointed as a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties herein, alleging that the said appointment was obtained by playing fraud upon this Court.
2. The case of the petitioners is that they have formed an unregistered partnership firm in the name and style of M/s.Krisha Agro Tech and that it is a ‘Partnership at Will’. The petitioners state that they are th
Point of Law : S.13(2) provides that a party who intends to challenge appointment of an arbitrator shall, within fifteen days after becoming aware of the constitution of the arbitral tribunal or afte....
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....
Court clarified that initial appointment of an Arbitrator must derive authority from the Arbitration Act, rejecting jurisdiction under Section 8 and confirming that participation does not waive juris....
Only a party to the arbitration agreement can challenge the appointment of an arbitrator under Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
An arbitrator's appointment by consent recorded in court meets legal requirements, and jurisdictional challenges based on alleged lack of procedure cannot invalidate prior agreements.
Court emphasized the appointment of an independent arbitrator when doubts of bias arise under arbitration agreements.
A unilateral appointment of an arbitrator by one party without the other's consent is invalid under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, rendering any orders made void.
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
