{"id":325118,"date":"2024-06-26T13:00:47","date_gmt":"2024-06-26T07:30:47","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=325118"},"modified":"2024-06-27T16:58:00","modified_gmt":"2024-06-27T11:28:00","slug":"jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/","title":{"rendered":"Court is required to look only into existence of the arbitration clause at the stage of appointing arbitrator u\/s 11 of Arbitration Act: Jharkhand HC"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Jharkhand High Court:<\/span> In an arbitration application filed by the Petitioner-Smart Chip Private Limited for appointment of sole arbitrator under Section 11(6)<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (‘the AC Act’) for resolution of disputes between the parties, Shree Chandrashekhar, ACJ.<\/span>, opined that under Section 11 of the AC Act, in cases where the parties did not agree to a procedure for appointment of an arbitrator for resolving the dispute on making an application by the aggrieved party, the power under Section 11(6) of the AC Act was exercisable by the Chief Justice of the High Court or a Judge nominated by the Chief Justice. At the present stage, it was not required to look beyond except existence of the arbitration clause; no more no less. Therefore, exercising the power under Section 11(6) of the AC Act, the Court requested Saibal Kumar Laik, a practicing Advocate of the High Court of Jharkhand to act as the sole Arbitrator for resolving the dispute between the parties.<\/p>\n

Background<\/p>\n

The petitioner was a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956<\/a>. Pursuant to a Request for Proposal floated by the respondent on 29-07-2017 for Supply, Installation, Commissioning and Management of Micro ATM and Allied Software to be used as field devices for carrying out financial inclusion transactions at approximately 2000 villages\/locations across the State of Jharkhand, the petitioner submitted its bid and was declared successful. Five work orders were issued to the petitioner between 17-08-2017 and 25-05-2018. Thereafter, some disputes cropped up in relation to the release of payment and non-supply of materials, there was an exchange of emails and letters between the parties. On 05-09-2022, the demand notice was given to the Cooperative Bank and a meeting was held on 11-10-2022 for amicably settling the dispute. Lastly, the petitioner issued a notice on 19-09-2023 under Section 21 of the AC Act.<\/p>\n

Subsequently, present petition was filed for appointment of sole arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties.<\/p>\n

The respondent-Cooperative Bank raised an objection to the maintainability of the present application on the ground that the petitioner being an agent governed under Section 48<\/a> of the Bihar Cooperative Societies Act, 1935<\/a>, was required to approach the Registrar of the Cooperative Societies for initiating a dispute resolution proceeding.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/p>\n

The Court prima facie opined that the clause 8 contained in “Request for Proposal for Supply, Installation, Commissioning and Management of Micro ATM and Allied Software” was an arbitration clause which should govern the parties in dispute.<\/p>\n

The Court after perusal of the objections taken by Cooperative Bank stated that the dialogue between the petitioner and the Cooperative Bank had come to a dead end. Under Section 11 of the AC Act, in cases where the parties did not agree to a procedure for appointment of an arbitrator for resolving the dispute on making an application by the aggrieved party, the power under Section 11(6) of the AC Act was exercisable by the Chief Justice of the High Court or a Judge nominated by the Chief Justice. The Court relied on N.N. Global Mercantile (P) Ltd. v. Indo Unique Flame Ltd.<\/span>, (2023) 7 SCC 1<\/a> and opined that at the present stage, it was not required to look beyond except existence of the arbitration clause; no more no less.<\/p>\n

Therefore, exercising the power under Section 11(6) of the AC Act, the Court requested Saibal Kumar Laik, a practicing Advocate of the High Court of Jharkhand to act as the sole Arbitrator for resolving the dispute between the parties. The Arbitrator might enter reference within 30 days from the communication of a copy of this order by the petitioner. Further, as agreed by the parties, the fee payable to the sole Arbitrator should be as per Schedule-4 of the AC Act and the seat of the Arbitrator should be at Ranchi.<\/p>\n

[Smart Chip (P) Ltd. v. Jharkhand State Cooperative Bank Ltd., 2024 SCC OnLine Jhar 1577<\/a>, Order dated 17-05-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

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

For the Petitioner:<\/span> Khushboo Kataruka, Advocate; Shubham Kataruka, Advocate; Ushma Pandey, Advocate;<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> Mrinal Kanti Roy, Advocate; Rishi Ranjan Vats, Advocate.<\/p>\n

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

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

The respondent raised an objection to the maintainability of the present application on the ground that the petitioner being an agent governed under Section 48<\/a> of the Bihar Cooperative Societies Act, 1935<\/a>, was required to approach the Registrar of the Cooperative Societies for initiating a dispute resolution proceeding.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67520,"featured_media":317614,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[24904,10131,23324,5791,70230,31135],"class_list":["post-325118","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-appointment-of-arbitrator","tag-arbitration-and-conciliation-act","tag-arbitration-clause","tag-jharkhand-high-court","tag-section-11-of-arbitration-act","tag-sole-arbitrator"],"yoast_head":"\nDuring appointment of arbitrator u\/s 11 of Arbitration Act, it is required to look only into existence of arbitration clause: JHC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Jharkhand High Court stated that at the present stage, it was not required to look beyond existence of the arbitration clause and requested Saibal Kumar Laik, a practicing Advocate of the High Court of Jharkhand to act as the sole Arbitrator.\" \/>\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\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Court is required to look only into existence of the arbitration clause at the stage of appointing arbitrator u\/s 11 of Arbitration Act: Jharkhand HC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Jharkhand High Court stated that at the present stage, it was not required to look beyond existence of the arbitration clause and requested Saibal Kumar Laik, a practicing Advocate of the High Court of Jharkhand to act as the sole Arbitrator.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/\" \/>\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=\"2024-06-26T07:30:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-06-27T11:28:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-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=\"Arushi\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Court is required to look only into existence of the arbitration clause at the stage of appointing arbitrator u\/s 11 of Arbitration Act: Jharkhand HC\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Arushi\" \/>\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\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/\",\"name\":\"During appointment of arbitrator u\/s 11 of Arbitration Act, it is required to look only into existence of arbitration clause: JHC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-06-26T07:30:47+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-06-27T11:28:00+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76\"},\"description\":\"Jharkhand High Court stated that at the present stage, it was not required to look beyond existence of the arbitration clause and requested Saibal Kumar Laik, a practicing Advocate of the High Court of Jharkhand to act as the sole Arbitrator.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Jharkhand High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Court is required to look only into existence of the arbitration clause at the stage of appointing arbitrator u\/s 11 of Arbitration Act: Jharkhand 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\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76\",\"name\":\"Arushi\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Arushi\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/arushi\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"During appointment of arbitrator u\/s 11 of Arbitration Act, it is required to look only into existence of arbitration clause: JHC | SCC Times","description":"Jharkhand High Court stated that at the present stage, it was not required to look beyond existence of the arbitration clause and requested Saibal Kumar Laik, a practicing Advocate of the High Court of Jharkhand to act as the sole Arbitrator.","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\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Court is required to look only into existence of the arbitration clause at the stage of appointing arbitrator u\/s 11 of Arbitration Act: Jharkhand HC","og_description":"Jharkhand High Court stated that at the present stage, it was not required to look beyond existence of the arbitration clause and requested Saibal Kumar Laik, a practicing Advocate of the High Court of Jharkhand to act as the sole Arbitrator.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-06-26T07:30:47+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-06-27T11:28:00+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Arushi","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Court is required to look only into existence of the arbitration clause at the stage of appointing arbitrator u\/s 11 of Arbitration Act: Jharkhand HC","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Arushi","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/","name":"During appointment of arbitrator u\/s 11 of Arbitration Act, it is required to look only into existence of arbitration clause: JHC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-06-26T07:30:47+00:00","dateModified":"2024-06-27T11:28:00+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76"},"description":"Jharkhand High Court stated that at the present stage, it was not required to look beyond existence of the arbitration clause and requested Saibal Kumar Laik, a practicing Advocate of the High Court of Jharkhand to act as the sole Arbitrator.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Jharkhand High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/06\/26\/jhc-during-appointment-of-arbitrator-u-s-11-of-arbitration-act-required-to-look-only-into-existence-of-arbitration-clause\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Court is required to look only into existence of the arbitration clause at the stage of appointing arbitrator u\/s 11 of Arbitration Act: Jharkhand 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\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76","name":"Arushi","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6b48b1199732c282ba60ff0b2a7076c33917ee6bd9aca6c333a92ceb8fcb6a3d?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Arushi"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/arushi\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"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":325118,"position":0},"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 "Case Briefs"","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":237643,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/17\/kar-hc-whether-an-insufficiently-stamped-sale-agreement-containing-arbitration-clause-for-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator-enforceable-under-s-116-of-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996-hc-reit\/","url_meta":{"origin":325118,"position":1},"title":"Kar HC | Whether an insufficiently stamped sale agreement, containing arbitration clause for appointment of sole arbitrator enforceable under S.11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; HC reiterates settled legal position on said premise","author":"Editor","date":"October 17, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: S.R. Krishna Kumar, J., allowing the present petition for the appointment of a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, held that, the decision made is restricted to the peculiar facts of the instant case and shall not be treated as a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":254584,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/23\/arbitration-and-conciliation-act-3\/","url_meta":{"origin":325118,"position":2},"title":"Chairman of party who entered into arbitration, can he be categorised as eligible under Arbitration and Conciliation Act? SC highlights impartiality of arbitrators as a key element while pronouncing this ruling","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"September 23, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Expressing on the aspect of independence and impartiality of the arbitrators, Division Bench of M.R. Shah and Aniruddha Bose, JJ., held that, Though the word 'Chairman' is not mentioned explicitly in Seventh Schedule, at the same time, it would fall under clause 1, clause 2, clause 5, and\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\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":253237,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/26\/arbitration-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":325118,"position":3},"title":"Ker HC | Syllogistic scope of Ss. 11(5) and 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, 1996; HC unclouds the line","author":"Editor","date":"August 26, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Kerala High Court: Devan Ramachandran, J., held that parties to arbitration cannot nominate the arbitrator even if the Arbitration Agreement provides so. Syllogistic Scope of Sections 11(5) and 11(6) of Arbitration Act The instant Arbitration Request dealt with certain novel, but interpretationally germane legal aspects appertaining Sections 11(2), 11(5) and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":272655,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/30\/calcutta-high-court-illegal-procedure-for-appointment-of-arbitrator-does-not-render-arbitration-agreement-illegal-in-toto-guiding-principles-for-appointment-of-arbitrator-reiterated\/","url_meta":{"origin":325118,"position":4},"title":"Calcutta High Court | Illegal procedure for appointment of Arbitrator does not render Arbitration agreement illegal in toto; Guiding Principles for Appointment of Arbitrator reiterated","author":"Editor","date":"August 30, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Calcutta High Court: In a petition challenging the appointment of sole Arbitrator by the respondent, Shekhar B. Saraf, J., held that merely because an arbitration clause provides for an illegal method of appointment of arbitrator, it does not come to an end and after removing the illegal portion\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","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":243660,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/10\/del-hc-on-invocation-of-arbitration-clause-if-a-party-appoints-arbitrator-on-its-own-and-does-not-receive-confirmation-from-another-party-should-former-approach-court-under-s-11-of-arbitration-ac\/","url_meta":{"origin":325118,"position":5},"title":"Del HC | On invocation of arbitration clause, if a party appoints arbitrator on its own and does not receive confirmation from another party, should former approach Court under S. 11 of Arbitration Act? HC discusses","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 10, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Kameswar Rao, J., decided a petition wherein on the invocation of the arbitration clause, one of the parties appointed the sole arbitrator on its own. The instant petition was filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Petitioner and the respondents entered into a\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/325118","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\/67520"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=325118"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/325118\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/317614"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=325118"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=325118"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=325118"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}