Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, VINAY SARAF
Wagad Infraprojects Pvt.Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Aryavrat Projects Developers Pvt.Ltd. – Respondent
ORDER :
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.
1. Petitioner impugns order dated 24.10.2024 whereby an application filed by the Petitioner under Order 6 Rule 17 of CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE seeking to amend the objections filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') has been dismissed.
2. Learned Commercial Court has dismissed the application filed for amendment on the ground that though a question relating to inherent lack of jurisdiction could be raised at any stage of litigation, however, Petitioner intended to raise the question relating to the jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal belatedly and said question being a mixed question of fact and law could not be permitted to be raised by way of an amendment to the application under Section 34 of the Act.
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Arbitral Tribunal had inherently lacked jurisdiction to entertain the claim for the reason that there was no arbitration agreement between the parties. It is contended that though an arbitration clause was incorporated in the original contract dated 01.01.2013 executed between the parties, subsequently, by an addendum dated 25.01.2016,
A party cannot challenge jurisdiction after previously admitting the existence of an arbitration agreement and participating in arbitration proceedings.
The rejection of amendment applications in arbitration proceedings based on delay is not an interim award and cannot be challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
A party cannot challenge the jurisdiction of an Arbitral Tribunal after submitting a statement of defence, as per Section 16(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 applies to all applications made before or during the arbitral proceedings or after an Award is pronounced under Part I of the Arbitration Act....
No power has been invested by Parliament in the Court to remand the matter to the Arbitral Tribunal except to adjourn the proceedings for the limited purpose mentioned in sub-section (4) of Section 3....
Point of Law : Power to modify, vary or remit the award does not exist under Section 34 of the Act.
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
