Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
Deepak Khot
D. Biswas – Appellant
Versus
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited – Respondent
ORDER :
Deepak Khot, J.
The present application has been filed by the applicant under section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1996') for appointment of an Arbitrator to resolve the dispute which arose between the parties pursuant to an agreement dated 28.1.2010 (Annexure A/2).
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that a NIT was issued on 7.11.2009 in respect of work "Operation and Comprehensive maintenance of Electro- mechanical service at TE Building, RSU and S/Qtrs, Civil Lines, Balaghat, RSU, Bharveli and MBM Waraseoni". The applicant being the successful bidder has obtained the work and an agreement dated 28.1.2010 has been issued. It is submitted that despite the applicant had completed the work, the payment was not made, therefore, a representation dated 30.12.2013 (annexure RJ-4) was issued to the respondent/non- applicant to verify from the site and make necessary payment. In the representation it was stated that the work was completed on 1.11.2013. It is further submitted that the applicant had filed an application under section 9 of the Act of 1996 on 30.11.2011 (annexure RJ2), which was registere
The court ruled that issues of limitation and jurisdiction are to be determined by the arbitrator, not by the court at the pre-reference stage under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an application filed under Section 11(6)(C) of the Act, 1996 is barred by limitation if filed after a delay of more than the period of three y....
The court clarified that post-2015 amendments, its role under Section 11 is limited to verifying the existence of an arbitration agreement, with other issues, including limitation, to be resolved by ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the limitation for filing an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act arises upon the failure to make the appointment of the arbitr....
(1) Period of limitation to file application under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is 3 years’ from date of refusal to appoint Arbitrator, or on expiry of 30 days’, whichever is ....
The interpretation of Section 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is that where the mandate of an arbitrator terminates, a substitute arbitrator shall be appointed according to the ru....
The existence of an arbitration agreement is sufficient for appointing an arbitrator, despite claims of alternative statutory remedies.
The arbitration application under Section 11(6) was not barred by limitation as it was filed within three years from the date of notice invoking arbitration, factoring delays linked to the Covid-19 e....
The court affirmed that an arbitration application under Section 11(6) was timely due to the COVID-19 limitation extension and upheld the validity of the arbitration mechanism despite amendments rend....
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
