Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. Anand Venkatesh, J
M.Sathyamoorthy – Appellant
Versus
Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks termination of arbitrator's mandate. (Para 2) |
| 2. court finds no grounds for termination under the act. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. petitioner opts to withdraw. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. court allows respondent to raise objections. (Para 7) |
| 5. petition closed with liberty to file anew. (Para 8) |
ORDER
This Court heard the learned counsel appearing on either side.
2. In the case in hand, the petitioner has sought for termination of the mandate and for reconstitution of the arbitral Tribunal. Hence, the petition has been filed under Section 15 and 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”).
3. In the case in hand, there is absolutely no material to show that the sole arbitrator has withdrawn from office for any reason. In any event, the pleadings were complete on 29.04.2024 and the time prescribed under Section 29A of the Act expired on 29.04.2025. Thereafter, no extension has been sought for by the petitioner under Section 29A(3) of the Act.
4. In view of the above, the case in hand neither falls under Section 14 nor under Section 15 of the Act. Since there is no material to show that the sole arbitrator has withdrawn from office, the
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
