Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J
SEPC Limited, Chennai – Appellant
Versus
Ace Technologies and Infrastructure Limited, Mumbai – Respondent
ORDER
This petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (in short “the Act”) seeking for appointment of an Arbitrator by this Court.
2. There seems to be a dispute between the petitioner and the respondent arising out of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 20.06.2016. There exists an arbitration clause in the said MoU dated 20.06.2016 and the same is extracted hereunder:-
“24. All dispute, differences and/or any claims those may arise between the parties against each other will be resolved by a Sole Arbitrator, to be appointed on mutual agreement, within 30 days, from the date on which a party communicates such dispute difference or claim to the other party and if no such agreement could be reached within such date, the sole arbitrator will be appointed following the provisions in Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 , as modified from time to time.
The provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 , as modified from time to time will be applicable to the said arbitration proceedings.”
3. The petitioner has invoked arbitration in accordance with Section 21 of the Act by issuing notice to the respondent on 29.11.2024. Admittedly,
A court has jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator if any part of the cause of action arises within its limits, even if a pending NCLT application exists.
A petition for appointment of an arbitrator must align with the correct procedural section; in this case, Section 11(5) applies as there was no agreed procedure, and jurisdiction is limited to that o....
The court ruled that a petition for appointing an arbitrator must be filed under Section 11(5) when no procedure is agreed upon, and jurisdiction lies where the cause of action arose.
Jurisdiction in arbitration is determined by the agreed seat, not the location of cause of action; court lacks jurisdiction where arbitration clause specifies exclusive jurisdiction elsewhere.
The seat of arbitration clause, fixing the seat of arbitration at New Delhi, resulted in courts at New Delhi being exclusively competent to entertain petitions under the 1996 Act, in exercise of its ....
The designation of a venue in an arbitration clause serves as the seat of arbitration, granting jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
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
