KURIAN JOSEPH, R.BANUMATHI
UNION OF INDIA – Appellant
Versus
BESCO LTD. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
KURIAN, J.
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4483 OF 2017 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 17838 of 2014)
Leave granted.
2. The short question arising for consideration in this case is whether the Chief Justice of a High Court or any person or institution designated by him, while exercising power under Section 11(6) of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) is bound to nominate an arbitrator as specified in the agreement for arbitration. The designated Judge in the High Court took the view that the appellant has lost the mandate to appoint an arbitrator since it failed to appoint the arbitrator within the permitted time and hence nominated an independent arbitrator.
3. Mr. Maninder Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General, placing reliance on Union of India and another v. M.P. Gupta, (2004) 10 SCC 504 and Union of India and others v. Master Construction Company, (2011) 12 SCC 349 submitted that the designated Judge, exercising the power under Section 11(6) of the Act, is bound to nominate a person as stipulated in the agreement for arbitration. In M.P. Gupta (supra), the relevant clauses on arbitration contained a provision that the arbitrators shou
Union of India and another v. M.P. Gupta
Union of India v. Master Construction Company
Northern Railway Administration, Ministry of Railway, New Delhi v. Patel Engineering Company Limited
North Eastern Railway v. Tripple Engineering Works
Indian Oil Corporation and others v. Raja Transport Private Limited
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.