Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
N.V.SHRAVAN KUMAR
Chennai Best Blue Metals – Appellant
Versus
Sarvepalli Vijay Sekhar – Respondent
ORDER :
N.V. SHRAVAN KUMAR, J.
This Arbitration Application has been filed under Section 11 (6)read with Section 15 (2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (for short ‘the Act’) seeking for an appointment of substitute Arbitrator for applicants and the respondent to adjudicate claims/disputes arose between the parties.
2. Brief facts as stated in the Arbitration Application are that the Applicant No.1 M/s.Chennai Best Blue Metals, is a partnership Firm, represented by its partner Smt.Sarvepalli Praveena. Applicant No.2 is Smt.Sarvepalli Praveena W/o.Sarvepally Vijay Sekhar. The sole respondent is Sarvepalli Vijay Sekhar.
3. The Applicant and the respondent are partners in the Applicant No.1 Firm vide Partnership Deed dated 03.03.2012 bearing registration No.672 of 2012 registered with the Registrar of Firms, Hyderabad South. The Applicant No.1 Firm is engaged in the business of mines and quarries. The profit and loss sharing ratio of the Applicant No.2 and the Respondent in the Applicant No.1 Firm is40% and 60%, respectively.
4. The Applicant No.1 Firm earlier was granted various mining leases by the then Government of Andhra Pradesh vide Proceedings (i) No.2957/TQL/2012, da
A partner lacks authority to represent a firm in arbitration without the express consent of other partners, and appointment of a substitute arbitrator requires adherence to agreed procedures under th....
The court established that upon recusal of an Arbitrator, a substitute must be appointed per Section 15(2) of the Arbitration Act, adhering to the initial appointment rules.
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....
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....
The court reaffirmed that the scope of inquiry under Section 11 is limited to determining the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement, and the withdrawal of a prior application does not con....
The main legal point established is the court's authority to appoint an Arbitrator when an Arbitration Agreement is invoked, and the need for detailed examination of the effect of new agreements on t....
The main legal point established is that if a contract contains an arbitration clause and the Arbitrator has not been appointed, the High Court is required to appoint an Arbitrator for resolution of ....
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
