{"id":261859,"date":"2022-02-17T09:00:55","date_gmt":"2022-02-17T03:30:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=261859"},"modified":"2022-02-18T09:23:15","modified_gmt":"2022-02-18T03:53:15","slug":"a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/","title":{"rendered":"Bombay HC rejects argument that a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud: Read why"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Bombay High Court: <\/strong>B.P. Colabawalla, J., addressed an arbitration application filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Instant application was filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking the appointment of a Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes and differences between the applicant and respondent arising out of the Service Level Agreement.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">High Court noted that the existence of the Arbitration Clause has not been disputed by the respondent.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Grounds on which the application was opposed:<\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li>Dispute between the parties is not arbitrable as the claims made by the applicant is outside the term of SLA as well as the pleaded case of the applicant as reflected<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">For the above-stated, respondent\u2019s counsel brought to the Court\u2019s attention Clause 2.1 of the SLA which defined the term of SLA and stipulated that the same shall continue to be in force and in effect for a period of three years and can be extended for a term of one year and shall supersede all prior or contemporaneous communications, proposals and agreements between the respondent and the petitioner.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Further, the counsel submitted that the period of SLA came to an end on 2-05-2017. However, the claim of the applicant was in relation to the services rendered and invoices raised for the period after 2-5-2017. Hence, he submitted that the disputes were clearly not arbitrable and there was no question of referring the disputes to arbitration.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">High Court stated that it cannot come to the conclusion as to whether the disputes between the applicant and the respondent are arbitrable or otherwise.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Another argument was that the disputes cannot be referred to arbitration because there is a fraud that has been played by the applicant on the respondent. On being unimpressed with the said argument, Court expressed that on the issue of fraud, the law is well settled. Supreme Court in <em>N.N. Global Mercantile (P) Ltd. v. Indo Unique Flame Ltd., <\/em><a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/0YbF0C3M\">(2021) 4 SCC 379<\/a>, clearly held that all civil or commercial disputes, either contractual or non-contractual, which can be adjudicated upon by a Civil Court, in principle, can be adjudicated and resolved through arbitration, unless it is excluded expressly either by statute, or by necessary implication.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Supreme Court has categorically held that <em>the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not exclude any category of disputes as being non-arbitrable. Section 2 (3) of the Arbitration Act, however, recognizes that certain categories of disputes by law may not be submitted to arbitration. Finally, the Supreme Court has held that the civil aspect of fraud is considered to be arbitrable in contemporary arbitration jurisprudence with the only exception being where the allegation is that the Arbitration Agreement itself is vitiated by fraud or fraudulent inducement, or the fraud goes to the validity of the underlying contract, and impeaches the arbitration clause itself.<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Respondent\u2019s case was that the alleged fraud was that the former employees of the Respondent (in connivance with the Applicant) continued to avail of the services of the Applicant beyond the expiry of the SLA merely to siphon off the funds of the Respondent unlawfully.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Further, the fraud alleged was that the former employees, along with the applicant siphoned off monies of the Respondent even after the expiry of the said SLA.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The Court opined that the respondent counsel\u2019s submission that dispute between parties cannot be referred to arbitration on account of fraud was incorrect.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">High Court held that it has no hesitation in constituting the arbitral tribunal to decide the disputes and differences between the applicant and the respondent arising out of the said SLA.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Parties agreed before the Court that for the purposes of deciding their disputes and differences Mikhail Behl an Advocate of this Court, be appointed as a Sole Arbitrator.<\/p>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"color: #008000;\">Order of the Court:<\/span><\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">(a) By consent of parties, Mr Mikhail Behl, an advocate of this Court is hereby appointed to act as a Sole Arbitrator to decide the disputes and differences between the Applicant and the Respondent arising out of and\/or in connection with and\/or in relation to the Service Level Agreement dated 3rd May, 2014.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">(b) A copy of this order will be communicated to the learned Sole Arbitrator by the advocates for the Applicant within a period of two weeks from today.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">(c) The learned Sole Arbitrator is requested to forward his Statement of Disclosure under Section 11 (8) read with Section 12 (1) of the Arbitration Act to the advocates for the Applicant so as to enable them to file the same in the Registry of this Court. The Registry of this Court shall retain the said Statement on the file of this Application and a copy of the same shall be furnished by the advocates for the Applicant to the advocates for the Respondent.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">(d) The parties shall appear before the Sole Arbitrator on such date and at such place as he nominates to obtain appropriate directions with regard to fixing a schedule for completing pleadings etc. The Arbitral Tribunal shall give all further directions with reference to the arbitration and also as to how it is to proceed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">(e) Contact and communication particulars shall be provided by both sides to the Sole Arbitrator within a period of two weeks. This information shall include a valid and functional email address as well as mobile numbers of the respective advocates.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">(f) The Respondent is at liberty to raise all questions of jurisdiction within the meaning of Section 16 of the Arbitration Act. All contentions in that regard are expressly kept open on both sides. It is made clear that any observations made by me herein are only prima facie and tentative and shall not bind the Arbitral Tribunal while deciding any issue of jurisdiction. It is however made clear that the Respondent shall not be allowed to contend before the Arbitral Tribunal that there does not exist an Arbitration Agreement as the same has been expressly admitted.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">(g) The parties have agreed that the Arbitral Tribunal shall be free to fix its own fees and shall not be bound by the 4th Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or the Bombay High Court (Fee payable to Arbitrators) Rules, 2018. The parties further agree that all arbitral costs and fees of the Arbitrator will be borne by the parties equally and will be subject to the final Award that may be passed by the Tribunal.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">(h) The parties immediately consent to a further extension of up to six months to complete the Arbitration should the learned Sole Arbitrator find it necessary.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">(i) The parties have agreed that the venue and seat of the arbitration will be in Mumbai.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In view of the above terms, the arbitration application was disposed of.[One Point One Solutions Ltd. v. Reliance Nippon Life Insurance Company Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/E07zvzVC\"><b>2021 SCC OnLine Bom 7861<\/b><\/a>, decided on 28-9-2021]<\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Advocates before the Court:<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mr Jamshed Master a\/w Delan Fernandez, Radhika Motwani i\/b Purazar P. Fouzdar, for the Applicant.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Mr Shyam Kapadia a\/w Dhruva Gandhi, Mehafrin Mehta i\/b HSA Advocates, for the Respondent.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Bombay High Court: B.P. Colabawalla, J., addressed an arbitration application filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Instant <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":260913,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[35672,3226,23324,17711,2518,3174,10141,29785,42834],"class_list":["post-261859","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-arbitral-tribunal","tag-arbitration","tag-arbitration-clause","tag-arbitrator","tag-Bombay_High_Court","tag-contract","tag-fraud","tag-law","tag-legal-news"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Bombay HC rejects argument that a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud: Read why | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bombay HC rejects argument that a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud: Read why\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2022-02-17T03:30:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2022-02-18T03:53:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Bombay_New-logo.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/\",\"name\":\"Bombay HC rejects argument that a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud: Read why | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Bombay_New-logo.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-02-17T03:30:55+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2022-02-18T03:53:15+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"description\":\"a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Bombay_New-logo.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Bombay_New-logo.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bombay HC rejects argument that a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud: Read why\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bombay HC rejects argument that a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud: Read why | SCC Times","description":"a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bombay HC rejects argument that a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud: Read why","og_description":"a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-02-17T03:30:55+00:00","article_modified_time":"2022-02-18T03:53:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Bombay_New-logo.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/","name":"Bombay HC rejects argument that a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud: Read why | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Bombay_New-logo.jpg","datePublished":"2022-02-17T03:30:55+00:00","dateModified":"2022-02-18T03:53:15+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"description":"a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Bombay_New-logo.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Bombay_New-logo.jpg","width":1331,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/17\/a-dispute-cannot-be-referred-for-arbitration-on-account-of-fraud\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bombay HC rejects argument that a dispute cannot be referred for arbitration on account of fraud: Read why"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/01\/Bombay_New-logo.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":305053,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/17\/bombay-high-court-denied-appointment-arbitrator-dispute-against-msme\/","url_meta":{"origin":261859,"position":0},"title":"Bombay High Court denies appointment of arbitrator for dispute against MSME","author":"Ridhi","date":"October 17, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court held the instant applications under Section 11 of Arbitration Act as non-maintainable and dismissed the said applications.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"bombay high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/bombay-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":301383,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/09\/13\/rajasthan-hc-seat-of-arbitration-has-exclusive-jurisdiction-for-applications-filed-u-s-11-of-the-ac-act-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":261859,"position":1},"title":"Seat of arbitration once fixed by the arbitration agreement, has the exclusive jurisdiction for applications u\/s 11 of the A&amp;C Act, 1996: Rajasthan High Court","author":"Editor","date":"September 13, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe Court observes that the \u2018contrary indicia\u2019 is clearly reflected in the present case, because the seat was mentioned as Bikaner and venue was mentioned as New Delhi.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"rajasthan high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/rajasthan-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/rajasthan-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/rajasthan-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/rajasthan-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":278787,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/30\/jharkhand-high-court-legal-research-legal-update-arbitration-conciliation-act-1996-section-116-section-152-section-21\/","url_meta":{"origin":261859,"position":2},"title":"Jharkhand High Court | Maintainability of application under S. 11(6), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of substitute arbitrator","author":"Editor","date":"November 30, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Jharkhand High Court: While allowing the application under Section 11(6), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) for appointment of substitute arbitrator, a single judge bench of Sujit Narayan Prasad, J. held that since first arbitrator was appointed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act after the applicant\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Jharkhand High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image38-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":272263,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/26\/calcutta-high-court-conduct-of-parties-not-a-substitute-for-an-arbitration-agreement\/","url_meta":{"origin":261859,"position":3},"title":"Calcutta High Court | Conduct of Parties &#8211; not a substitute for an arbitration agreement","author":"Editor","date":"August 26, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Calcutta High Court: While deciding a review petition, Debangsu Basak, J. held that the court while exercising powers under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 cannot substitute arbitration agreement with conduct of parties. Facts of the Case The respondent filed an application under Section 11\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Calcutta High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":281153,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/06\/bombay-high-court-appoints-arbitrator-in-case-where-arbitration-clause-tax-invoice-legalnew-legalresearch-legalawareness\/","url_meta":{"origin":261859,"position":4},"title":"Bombay High Court analyses whether \u2018referring disputes to a sole arbitrator\u2019 printed at the back of the tax invoice amount to an arbitration clause","author":"Editor","date":"January 6, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Any document in writing exchanged between the parties which provide a record of the agreement and in respect of which there is no denial by the other side, would squarely fall within the ambit of Section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and would amount to an arbitration\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/Bombay-High-Court-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":375099,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/07\/theres-distinction-between-claim-to-be-made-and-petition-under-section-11-of-arbitration-act-to-be-filed-ph-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":261859,"position":5},"title":"Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 | Time-Barred Claim \u2260 Time-Barred Section 11 Petition: Punjab and Haryana High Court appoints Second Arbitrator","author":"Shriya Singh","date":"February 7, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe issue with regard to the time barred claim is not to be gone into at the reference stage under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 but can be seen only by the Arbitrator\/Arbitration Tribunal at the relevant stage.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"claim to be made and petition under Section 11 Arbitration Act","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/claim-to-be-made-and-petition-under-Section-11-Arbitration-Act.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/claim-to-be-made-and-petition-under-Section-11-Arbitration-Act.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/claim-to-be-made-and-petition-under-Section-11-Arbitration-Act.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/claim-to-be-made-and-petition-under-Section-11-Arbitration-Act.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/261859","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=261859"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/261859\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/260913"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=261859"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=261859"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=261859"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}