{"id":285619,"date":"2023-02-27T18:00:33","date_gmt":"2023-02-27T12:30:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=285619"},"modified":"2023-03-14T11:17:41","modified_gmt":"2023-03-14T05:47:41","slug":"delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi High Court clarifies the position of Res Judicata with respect to Section 11 of the Arbitration Act"},"content":{"rendered":"<div style=\"text-align: justify; line-height: 150%;\">\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\"><b>Delhi High Court:<\/b> While dealing with an arbitration petition filed under Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001544910\">11(6)<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726958\">Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (&#8216;Act of 1996&#8217;), the single judge bench of V. Kameswar Rao, J., held that the present petition filed by the petitioner was not maintainable <i>inter se<\/i> parties, as the issue of appointment of an arbitrator had attained finality with the order passed by Supreme Court in <i>United India Insurance Company Limited<\/i> v. <i>Antique Art Exports Pvt. Ltd.<\/i>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000130897\">(2019) 5 SCC 362<\/a> (&#8216;Antique Art Export&#8217;).<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">In the matter at hand, the petition was filed by Antique Art Export Pvt. Ltd. (&#8216;petitioner&#8217;) as against United India Insurance Company (&#8216;respondent&#8217;) for appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The issue for consideration before the Court was whether the present petitions would be maintainable in view of the fact that petitioner had already filed petitions seeking appointment of an Arbitrator which though allowed by Delhi High Court in 2017, but on a challenge by the respondent before the Supreme Court had been allowed <i>vide<\/i> a common judgment in 2019, wherein it was held that, no arbitral dispute subsists between the parties, resulting in the Supreme Court setting aside the order of Delhi High Court appointing the Arbitrator. Even the review petition filed by the petitioner seeking review of 2019 common judgment of the Supreme Court was dismissed.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The bench dismissed the contention of the petitioner which stated that since the judgment of Antique Art Export was overruled by <i>Mayavati Trading Pvt Ltd.<\/i> v. <i>Pradyuat Deb Burman<\/i>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-9000284073\">(2019) 8 SCC 714<\/a>, the doctrine of <i>res judicate<\/i> would not be applicable. The Court was of the view that the dispute <i>inter se<\/i> the parties with regard to the appointment of Arbitrator had attained finality with the decision of the Supreme Court in Antique Art Export. It further stated that the Supreme Court had laid down the correct law and did not declare the Antique Art Export judgment as a nullity thus, making it binding between the parties.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The bench held that the submission of the petitioner that the Supreme Court in Antique Arts Export should have only considered the existence of arbitration agreement as misconceived and was of the view that such cannot be a ground to re-open an issue which was already settled between the parties.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court further dismissing the argument stated by the petitioner that the Antique Art Export judgment was erroneous and without jurisdiction, in view of Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001544910\">11(6)(A)<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726958\">Act of 1996<\/a> held that the proceedings under the said section would be governed by the principle of <i>res judicata<\/i> in view of the judgment in <i>Anil<\/i> v. <i>Rajendra<\/i>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0000051065\">(2015) 2 SCC 583<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court while relying on Anil v Rajendra (Supra) stated that the argument of the petitioner that Section 11 petition was not made to the &#8216;Court&#8217; withing the meaning of Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001544920\">2(1)(e)<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726958\">Act of 1996<\/a>, therefore, not attracting Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001544948\">42<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726958\">Act of 1996<\/a> was misplaced since the exercise of the power by the High Court or the Supreme Court under Section <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0001544910\">11(6)<\/a> of the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink.aspx?q=JTXT-0002726958\">Act of 1996<\/a> was a judicial function. Thus, the High Court could determine the issue of maintainability including territorial jurisdiction and <i>res judicata<\/i>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court was of the view that High Court would be within its right to dismiss the petition at the threshold if the petition is not maintainable, otherwise an unacceptable position of law would arise where despite a petition being not maintainable due to lack of territorial jurisdiction would need to be entertained.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">The Court was thus of the view that the present petition filed by the petitioner was not maintainable <i>inter se<\/i> parties, as the issue of appointment of an arbitrator had attained finality with the order passed by Supreme Court in Antique Art Export.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">With these observations, the bench dismissed the petition.<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-bottom: 3%;\">[<span style=\"font-weight: bold; color: #632423;\">Antique Art Export Pvt. Ltd. v United India Insurance Company Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/X2iJX34k\">2023 SCC OnLine Del 1091<\/a>, decided on 22-02-2023<\/span>]<\/p>\n<hr\/>\n<p>Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\">For the petitioner- Advocate Manish Kaushik and Advocate Ajit Singh;<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\">For the respondent- Advocate Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate K. Enatoli Sema, Advocate Chubalemla Chang and Advocate Tavikato Achumi;<\/p>\n<p style=\"margin-left: 18pt;\">Judgment Authored by Justice V. Kameswar Rao.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p><i>Delhi High Court was of the view that it would be within its right to dismiss the petition at the threshold if the petition is not maintainable, otherwise an unacceptable position of law would arise where despite a petition being not maintainable due to lack of territorial jurisdiction would need to be entertained.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67517,"featured_media":284692,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[24904,43926,2543,25753,5353],"class_list":["post-285619","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-appointment-of-arbitrator","tag-arbitration-act","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-insurance-company","tag-res-judicata"],"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>Delhi High Court clarifies the position of Res Judicata with respect to Section 11 of the Arbitration Act | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"While dealing with an arbitration petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the single judge\" \/>\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\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi High Court clarifies the position of Res Judicata with respect to Section 11 of the Arbitration Act\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"While dealing with an arbitration petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the single judge\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/\" \/>\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=\"2023-02-27T12:30:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2023-03-14T05:47:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 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\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi High Court clarifies the position of Res Judicata with respect to Section 11 of the Arbitration Act | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2023-02-27T12:30:33+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2023-03-14T05:47:41+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624\"},\"description\":\"While dealing with an arbitration petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the single judge\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delhi High Court clarifies the position of Res Judicata with respect to Section 11 of the Arbitration Act\"}]},{\"@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\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d822f35f9fcd11386aa47345cde7945e45a64da7205eebe9784f21d0cd223603?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d822f35f9fcd11386aa47345cde7945e45a64da7205eebe9784f21d0cd223603?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-online-editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Delhi High Court clarifies the position of Res Judicata with respect to Section 11 of the Arbitration Act | SCC Times","description":"While dealing with an arbitration petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the single judge","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\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi High Court clarifies the position of Res Judicata with respect to Section 11 of the Arbitration Act","og_description":"While dealing with an arbitration petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the single judge","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2023-02-27T12:30:33+00:00","article_modified_time":"2023-03-14T05:47:41+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png","type":"image\/png"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/","name":"Delhi High Court clarifies the position of Res Judicata with respect to Section 11 of the Arbitration Act | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png","datePublished":"2023-02-27T12:30:33+00:00","dateModified":"2023-03-14T05:47:41+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624"},"description":"While dealing with an arbitration petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the single judge","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/27\/delhi-high-court-states-effect-of-res-judicata-on-section-11-of-arbitration-act-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delhi High Court clarifies the position of Res Judicata with respect to Section 11 of the Arbitration Act"}]},{"@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\/84913f82186a8dea042dc300d5751624","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d822f35f9fcd11386aa47345cde7945e45a64da7205eebe9784f21d0cd223603?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d822f35f9fcd11386aa47345cde7945e45a64da7205eebe9784f21d0cd223603?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-online-editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/02\/MicrosoftTeams-image-472.png","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"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":285619,"position":0},"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":[]},{"id":293987,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/06\/delhi-court-sets-aside-90-lakh-arbitral-award-bmw-india-financial-services\/","url_meta":{"origin":285619,"position":1},"title":"Delhi Court sets aside &#8377;90 lakh award granted in favour of BMW India Financial Services Pvt. Ltd.","author":"Editor","date":"June 6, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Unilateral Appointment of the Sole Arbitrator vitiates the proceedings of Arbitration.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Patiala House Courts","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-774.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-774.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-774.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-774.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":323372,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/01\/will-arbitration-proceedings-survive-if-mandate-of-arbitrator-is-terminated-dhc-answers-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":285619,"position":2},"title":"Will arbitration proceedings survive if mandate of arbitrator is terminated? Delhi HC answers","author":"Editor","date":"June 1, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe arbitral proceedings in the matter were not terminated but the Arbitrator had been non-responsive and was unable to perform his functions. Thus, as per Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the present case is suited for appointment of a substitute Arbitrator for adjudicating the\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":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":322604,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/05\/21\/delhi-high-court-sets-aside-arbitral-award-passed-sole-arbitrator-unilaterally-appointed-violation-section12-arbitration-act-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":285619,"position":3},"title":"Delhi High Court sets aside arbitral award due to violation of S. 12(5) Arbitration Act","author":"Editor","date":"May 21, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIt is well settled principle that unilateral appointment of Arbitrator is not permissible under the law\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":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":294793,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/06\/16\/delhi-hc-sets-aside-arbitral-award-by-arbitrator-de-jure-inability-legal-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":285619,"position":4},"title":"Delhi High Court sets aside arbitral award passed by Arbitrator having de jure inability to pass the award","author":"Arunima","date":"June 16, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The ineligibility of an Arbitrator goes to the root of his jurisdiction and the Arbitral Award cannot be considered as valid.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-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\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":324535,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/17\/del-hc-appoints-sole-arbitrator-despite-clause-specifying-two-arbitrators-upholds-parties-intention-to-arbitrate-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":285619,"position":5},"title":"Delhi High Court appoints sole arbitrator despite clause specifying two arbitrators; Upholds parties&#8217; intention to arbitrate","author":"Editor","date":"June 17, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court noted Arbitration agreement specifying an even number of arbitrators cannot be a ground to render the arbitration agreement invalid. Appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) petition.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/285619","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\/67517"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=285619"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/285619\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/284692"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=285619"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=285619"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=285619"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}