Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.ANAND VENKATESH
China Datang Technologies and Engineering Company Limited – Appellant
Versus
NLC India Limited – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. parties involved in arbitration. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
| 2. jurisdiction issues and consent. (Para 5 , 9) |
| 3. court's appointment of arbitrator. (Para 6 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. effects of inherent lack of jurisdiction. (Para 22 , 27 , 28 , 37) |
| 5. setting aside of the arbitral award. (Para 52 , 53) |
ORDER :
Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.) No.141 of 2023 is a petition filed under Section 34 (2)(b)(iii) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for brevity, the Act) by one M/s.China Datang Technologies and Engineering Company Limited seeking to set aside an arbitral award dated 09.11.2022 and for a direction to M/s.NLC India Limited to restore the contract performance guarantee amounting to Rs.55.65 Crores encashed on 11.11.2022.
2. Arb.O.P.(Com.Div.) No.333 of 2023 is a petition filed under Section 34 (2) of the Act by the said M/s.NLC India Limited questioning the same award in so far as awarding claims IV and V in favour of the said M/s.China Datang Technologies and Engineering Company Limited and rejection of the counter claim made by said M/s.NLC India Limited were concerned.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as per their respective rank before the Arbitral Tri
The High Court lacks jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator in international commercial arbitration, as such powers lie exclusively with the Supreme Court, making any award from improperly appointed t....
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.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that objections to jurisdiction must be raised at the appropriate stage, and the findings of the arbitrator on the point of jurisdiction, if not ch....
The appointment of a sole arbitrator deviated from the statutory requirements and terms of the arbitration agreement, making proceedings invalid under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Jurisdictional objections to arbitration awards must be raised during proceedings, not at execution; failure to do so leads to unenforceable awards.
Participation in arbitration without objection constitutes a waiver of the right to challenge the appointment of the arbitrator, as per Sections 4 and 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
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....
The court emphasized the necessity for impartiality in arbitration, ruling that automatic appointments of arbitrators undermined the arbitration clause, rendering the award invalid.
The High Court's appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) does not grant it jurisdiction over objections to the arbitral award under Section 34; objections must be heard in the proper princip....
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
