Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator violates the principles of fair arbitration as established by existing legal precedents.

ORDER

This petition has been filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 , challenging the impugned arbitral award dated 12.10.2023. The petitioners have challenged the impugned arbitral award on the ground that the arbitral award has been passed by an arbitrator, appointed unilaterally by the respondent / claimant. The petitioners have also challenged the impugned arbitral award on the ground that no notice has been received by the petitioners in the arbitration.

2. This Court has perused and examined the impugned arbitral award.

As seen from the same, the arbitrator, who has passed the award, has been appointed unilaterally by the respondent / claimant. The law is now well settled by the Honourable Supreme Court through its decision rendered in Perkins Eastman Architects Dpc & Another v. HSCC (India) Ltd. reported in 2020 (20) SCC 760 that an arbitrator cannot be appointed unilaterally by any of the parties to the dispute as it is legally impermissible under law. Since in the case on hand, the respondent / claimant has appointed the arbitrator, who has passed the impugned arbitral award unilaterally, without the consent of the petitioners, the impugned arbitral award has to be necessarily set aside by this Court. It is also to be noted that the impugned arbitral award is an exparte arbitral award and the petitioners did not participate in the arbitration.

3. For the foregoing reasons, the impuged arbitral award dated