{"id":324441,"date":"2024-06-15T09:00:24","date_gmt":"2024-06-15T03:30:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=324441"},"modified":"2024-06-20T14:39:13","modified_gmt":"2024-06-20T09:09:13","slug":"mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/","title":{"rendered":"Mere sending notice u\/s 21 of Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice is prerequisite for commencement of proceedings: Delhi HC"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> In a petition under Section 11(6)<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (‘Arbitration Act’) for appointment of an arbitrator, Dinesh Kumar Sharma, J.<\/span>, dismissed the petition while holding that the mere issuance of notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act does not constitute service of the notice and observed that receipt of the notice by the respondent is mandatory to commence arbitration proceedings.<\/p>\n

Background<\/p>\n

An agreement was entered into between the petitioner and respondent, after which a purchase order was issued. Thereafter, disputes arose between the parties and an arbitration notice was issued by the petitioner to the respondent, by virtue of the arbitration clause contained in the agreement.<\/p>\n

The respondent asserted that the purported arbitration notice under Section 21<\/a> of the Arbitration Act<\/a> was never served upon the respondent and that the notice was addressed to “T-5, Mangol Puri Industrial Area, Phase I, New Delhi” whereas the complete address of the respondent was “T-5\/237, Mangol Puri, Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi-110083”, as reflected in the agreement between the parties. Respondent further contended that in absence of notice under Section 21<\/a> of the Arbitration Act<\/a> the petition for appointment of arbitrator was not maintainable.<\/p>\n

Decision and Analysis<\/p>\n

The Court, referring to Section 21<\/a> of the Arbitration Act<\/a>, said it was settled law that service of notice is a prerequisite for the commencement of arbitration proceedings.<\/p>\n

The Court further cited Alupro Building Systems Pvt. Ltd.<\/span> v. Ozone Overseas Pvt. Ltd.<\/span>, 2017 SCC OnLine Del 7228<\/a>, wherein it was held that simply issuing a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration Act was not sufficient and receipt of the notice by the addressee was mandatory for the commencement of the arbitration proceedings.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that there was no reason for it to dissent from the already laid down position of law and held that given the facts of the present case, the notice had not been sent to the complete address of the respondent thereby resulting in the incomplete service of the notice under Section 21<\/a> of the Arbitration Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court, therefore, dismissed the petition.<\/p>\n

[Indian Spinal Injuris Centre v. Galaxy India, 2024 SCC OnLine Del 4385<\/a>, Order dated 08-05-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

Advocate for the Petitioner:<\/span> Sandeep Kapoor, Advocate<\/p>\n

Advocates for the Respondent:<\/span> Anshul Goel, Sanjeev Kumar, Ashok Goel, Advocates<\/p>\n

Buy Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996   HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"arbitration<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In the present case, the notice has not been sent to the complete address which results in incomplete service of notice.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":314886,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[53264,10131,2543,69851,69850,28244],"class_list":["post-324441","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-arbitral-proceeding","tag-arbitration-and-conciliation-act","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-invocation-notice","tag-section-21-notice","tag-service-of-notice"],"yoast_head":"\nMere sending notice u\/s 21 Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice prerequisite commencement proceedings: DHC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court held that mere issuance of notice does not constitute service of the notice and the receipt of the notice by the respondent is mandatory to commence arbitration proceedings.\" \/>\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\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Mere sending notice u\/s 21 of Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice is prerequisite for commencement of proceedings: Delhi HC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court held that mere issuance of notice does not constitute service of the notice and the receipt of the notice by the respondent is mandatory to commence arbitration proceedings.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/\" \/>\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=\"2024-06-15T03:30:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-06-20T09:09:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Mere sending notice u\/s 21 of Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice is prerequisite for commencement of proceedings: Delhi HC\" \/>\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=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"headline\":\"Mere sending notice u\\\/s 21 of Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice is prerequisite for commencement of proceedings: Delhi HC\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-06-15T03:30:24+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-06-20T09:09:13+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":406,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"arbitral proceeding\",\"arbitration and conciliation act\",\"Delhi High Court\",\"invocation notice\",\"Section 21 notice\",\"Service of notice\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"High Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/\",\"name\":\"Mere sending notice u\\\/s 21 Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice prerequisite commencement proceedings: DHC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-06-15T03:30:24+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-06-20T09:09:13+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court held that mere issuance of notice does not constitute service of the notice and the receipt of the notice by the respondent is mandatory to commence arbitration proceedings.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/02\\\/Delhi-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Delhi High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2024\\\/06\\\/15\\\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Mere sending notice u\\\/s 21 of Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice is prerequisite for commencement of proceedings: Delhi HC\"}]},{\"@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\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_4\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Mere sending notice u\/s 21 Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice prerequisite commencement proceedings: DHC | SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court held that mere issuance of notice does not constitute service of the notice and the receipt of the notice by the respondent is mandatory to commence arbitration proceedings.","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\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Mere sending notice u\/s 21 of Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice is prerequisite for commencement of proceedings: Delhi HC","og_description":"Delhi High Court held that mere issuance of notice does not constitute service of the notice and the receipt of the notice by the respondent is mandatory to commence arbitration proceedings.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-06-15T03:30:24+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-06-20T09:09:13+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Mere sending notice u\/s 21 of Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice is prerequisite for commencement of proceedings: Delhi HC","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"headline":"Mere sending notice u\/s 21 of Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice is prerequisite for commencement of proceedings: Delhi HC","datePublished":"2024-06-15T03:30:24+00:00","dateModified":"2024-06-20T09:09:13+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/"},"wordCount":406,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","keywords":["arbitral proceeding","arbitration and conciliation act","Delhi High Court","invocation notice","Section 21 notice","Service of notice"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","High Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/","name":"Mere sending notice u\/s 21 Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice prerequisite commencement proceedings: DHC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-06-15T03:30:24+00:00","dateModified":"2024-06-20T09:09:13+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Delhi High Court held that mere issuance of notice does not constitute service of the notice and the receipt of the notice by the respondent is mandatory to commence arbitration proceedings.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Delhi High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/15\/mere-sending-notice-u-s-21-arbitration-act-not-sufficient-receipt-of-notice-prerequisite-commence-proceedings-dhc\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Mere sending notice u\/s 21 of Arbitration Act not sufficient; receipt of notice is prerequisite for commencement of proceedings: Delhi HC"}]},{"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":281990,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/01\/19\/delhi-high-court-quashes-arbitral-award-seeking-payment-as-the-notice-was-not-served-no-effective-delivery-notice-under-section-21-aribtration-act-wrong-application-of-governing-law-legalnews-legalres\/","url_meta":{"origin":324441,"position":0},"title":"Delhi High Court quashes arbitral award for ineffective delivery of notice and wrong application of Indian laws in a case governing UAE Federal Labour Law","author":"Editor","date":"January 19, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court has a duty to ensure compliance with the principles of natural justice and when an award has been passed without complying with the mandatory principles of natural justice, this Court being the custodian of rights and liberties of parties must take its guard to correct the infirmities which\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","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\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":283558,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/10\/in-cases-of-urgency-and-to-preserve-partys-rights-arbitral-proceedings-can-be-initiated-even-when-conciliation-proceedings-were-pending-delhi-high-court-legal-research-updates-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":324441,"position":1},"title":"In cases of urgency and to preserve party’s rights, arbitral proceedings can be initiated even when conciliation proceedings were pending: Delhi High Court","author":"Editor","date":"February 10, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Delhi High Court held that even if the Contract clearly stated that before resorting to arbitration, the parties agreed to explore Conciliation by the Committee, the same cannot be held to be mandatory in nature. Further, the Court held that in case of urgency, arbitral proceedings can be initiated\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","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\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":212695,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/30\/bom-hc-onus-show-proper-notice-of-arbitrators-appointment-is-on-respondent-if-disputed-by-petitioner\/","url_meta":{"origin":324441,"position":2},"title":"Bom HC | Onus to show proper notice of arbitrator’s appointment is on respondent if disputed by petitioner","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 30, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court:\u00a0S.V. Gupte, J., set aside an arbitral award for respondent's failure to show proper notice of appointment of the arbitrator to the petitioner. The petitioner challenged the subject arbitration award passed by a sole arbitrator under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on the ground,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","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\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":276868,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/05\/prayer-for-appointment-arbitrator-cannot-rejected-ground-vague-bereft-of-material-particulars-gujarathighcourt-legal-update-research-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":324441,"position":3},"title":"Gujarat High Court | Notice for appointment of arbitrator cannot be rejected on ground of vague material particulars","author":"Editor","date":"November 5, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Gujarat High Court: While deciding the instant petition, Aravind Kumar, C.J., said that the prayer for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation (\u2018A&C\u2019) Act, 2016 cannot be rejected on the ground that it is vague or bereft of the material particulars as\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Gujarat High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-259.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-259.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-259.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-259.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-259.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":280427,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/12\/27\/order-of-stay-moratorium-under-the-companies-act-2013-prohibits-the-initiation-of-any-proceedings-parties-cannot-be-referred-to-arbitration-delhi-high-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":324441,"position":4},"title":"Order of stay\/moratorium under the Companies Act, 2013 prohibits the initiation of any proceedings; Parties cannot be referred to Arbitration: Delhi High Court","author":"Editor","date":"December 27, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"The Delhi High Court ruled that the moratorium granted by the NCLAT, staying the institution of suits and proceedings against the Corporate Debtor, after the resolution process was initiated against it under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013, was akin to an order of moratorium passed under\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","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\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":291751,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/10\/supreme-court-resolves-enigma-retrospective-applicability-of-arbitration-amendment-act-2015-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":324441,"position":5},"title":"Notice invoking arbitration issued prior to 2015 Amendment but application filed post Amendment: SC resolves enigma around applicability of Arbitration Amendment Act 2015","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"May 10, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Upholding the Telangana High Court judgment, the Supreme Court held that the law prevailing prior to the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 shall be applicable in a case where the notice invoking arbitration is issued prior to the Amendment Act, 2015.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"applicability of arbitration amendment act 2015","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/applicability-of-arbitration-amendment-act-2015.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/applicability-of-arbitration-amendment-act-2015.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/applicability-of-arbitration-amendment-act-2015.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/applicability-of-arbitration-amendment-act-2015.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/324441","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\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=324441"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/324441\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314886"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=324441"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=324441"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=324441"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}