{"id":341729,"date":"2025-02-18T10:00:04","date_gmt":"2025-02-18T04:30:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=341729"},"modified":"2025-02-20T12:06:59","modified_gmt":"2025-02-20T06:36:59","slug":"merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/","title":{"rendered":"Merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction: Jharkhand HC sets aside order dismissing S.34 arbitration application"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Jharkhand High Court:<\/span> The present petition was filed under Article 227<\/a> of Constitution<\/a> to quash the order dated 30-11-2023, whereby the application filed by petitioner under Section 34<\/a> of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (‘A&C Act’) was dismissed, on the ground that since sole arbitrator was appointed by Orissa High Court, the Commercial Court, Ranchi did not have the jurisdiction to proceed with the application for setting aside the award.<\/p>\n

Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.<\/span>, stated that merely because with consent of parties, the arbitrator was appointed by the Orissa High Court, that could not be a ground that Ranchi court was not having jurisdiction, as Section 11 application was not decided by the Court. The Court stated that the Court at Ranchi did have the jurisdiction as the arbitration proceeding took place at Ranchi with the permission of the Orissa High Court and the seat and venue in the agreement was also at Ranchi. Further, the Court stated that both the parties had agreed to go for the arbitration at Ranchi, which clearly suggested that the intention was there that the proceeding would be conducted at Ranchi. Thus, the Court set aside the order dated 30-11-2023.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The petitioner submitted that it was a Central Public Sector Undertaking, operating under the aegis of Ministry of Steel, Government of India and was engaged in the business of providing consultancy and engineering services. It was further submitted that the respondent was a private limited company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956<\/a> and was engaged in the business of manufacturing, construction and civil\/mechanical engineering.<\/p>\n

The petitioner submitted that certain disputes had arisen between the petitioner and respondent regarding the contract that was entered into between the parties. Thereafter, the respondent filed an application under Section 11(6)<\/a> of the A&C Act<\/a>, before the Orissa High Court, for appointment of the arbitrator. The Orissa High Court appointed the sole arbitrator. Subsequently, the sole arbitrator proceeded with the arbitral proceedings and rendered his award on 26-03-2023, which was impugned under Section 34<\/a> of A&C Act<\/a>, before the Commercial Court, Ranchi (‘Ranchi court’).<\/p>\n

The petitioner submitted that the respondent appeared before the Ranchi court and challenged the maintainability of the application on the ground that the since the application for appointment of arbitrator was before Orissa High Court, therefore as per Section 42<\/a> of A&C Act<\/a>, courts in Orissa would have the jurisdiction to hear the matters. Thus, vide order dated 30-11-2023, the petitioner’s application was dismissed.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law, and Decision<\/h3>\n

Regarding maintainability of the present petition, the Court stated that undoubtedly, it was prudent for a Judge to not exercise discretion to allow judicial interference beyond the procedure established under the enactment. This power needed to be exercised in exceptional rarity, wherein, one party was left remediless or a clear ‘bad faith’ shown by one of the parties. The High Court could interfere, when there had been a patent perversity in the orders of tribunals and courts subordinate to it or where there had been a gross and manifest failure of justice, or the basic principles of nature justice was flouted.<\/p>\n

Since the petitioner had earlier moved an appeal and the same was dismissed as withdrawn, there was no finality in the appeal and the petitioner had found out remedy under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>. The Court stated that the parties could not be allowed to be remediless and therefore, the petition under Article 227<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a> was maintainable.<\/p>\n

The Court stated that once the seat was chosen by the parties in terms of contract\/agreement, the place of the Court was having jurisdiction. Merely because with consent of parties, the arbitrator was appointed by the Orissa High Court, that could not be a ground that Ranchi court was not having jurisdiction, as Section 11 application was not decided by the Court. The intention of both the parties where to go for arbitration, was Ranchi and the proceeding after permission of the High Court was also conducted at Ranchi and in the agreement, the seat was also said to be at Ranchi. Thus, Ranchi court had jurisdiction.<\/p>\n

The Court relied on BGS SGS SOMA JV v. NHPC Ltd<\/span>, (2020) 4 SCC 234<\/a> and stated that whenever designation of the place of arbitration in arbitration clause as being “venue” of arbitration proceeding was there, the expression “arbitration proceeding” would make it clear that “venue” was really the seat of arbitral proceeding. However, the same will have different impact if there were contrary indicia and, in that context, the stated venue was merely a venue and not a seat of the arbitration proceeding.<\/p>\n

Thus, the Court stated that the Court at Ranchi did have the jurisdiction as the arbitration proceeding took place at Ranchi with the permission of the Orissa High Court and the seat and venue in the agreement was also at Ranchi. Further, the Court stated that both the parties had agreed to go for the arbitration at Ranchi, which clearly suggested that the intention was there that the proceeding would be conducted at Ranchi. The law in this regard was well settled and, as such, the order dated 30-11-2023, was set aside and it was held that Ranchi court had the jurisdiction. The petition filed by the petitioner under Section 34<\/a> of the A&C Act<\/a> was restored to the court concerned, who would proceed and decide the same, in accordance with law.<\/p>\n

[MECON Ltd. v. K.C.S. (P) Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine Jhar 376<\/a>, decided on 04-02-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

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

For the Petitioner:<\/span> Shresth Gautam, Advocate and Yogendra Yadav, Advocate.<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> Suvendu Kumar Ray, Advocate and Bhaskar Kumar, Advocate.<\/p>\n

Buy Constitution of India  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"Constitution<\/a><\/p>\n

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

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

The intention of both the parties where to go for arbitration, is at Ranchi and the proceeding after permission of the High Court was also conducted at Ranchi and in the agreement, the seat is also said to be at Ranchi. Thus, Ranchi court is having jurisdiction.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67520,"featured_media":333852,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[3226,40741,17711,5791,3686,70881,71583],"class_list":["post-341729","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-arbitration","tag-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996","tag-arbitrator","tag-jharkhand-high-court","tag-Jurisdiction","tag-justice-sanjay-kumar-dwivedi","tag-section-34-of-arbitration-act"],"yoast_head":"\nMerely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction: JHC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Jharkhand HC sets aside impugned order and stated that merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction.\" \/>\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\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction: Jharkhand HC sets aside order dismissing S.34 arbitration application\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Jharkhand HC sets aside impugned order and stated that merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/\" \/>\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=\"2025-02-18T04:30:04+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-02-20T06:36:59+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Jharkhand-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\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\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Arushi\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction: Jharkhand HC sets aside order dismissing S.34 arbitration application\" \/>\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=\"5 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\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/\",\"name\":\"Merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction: JHC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-02-18T04:30:04+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-02-20T06:36:59+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76\"},\"description\":\"Jharkhand HC sets aside impugned order and stated that merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Jharkhand High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction: Jharkhand HC sets aside order dismissing S.34 arbitration application\"}]},{\"@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":"Merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction: JHC | SCC Times","description":"Jharkhand HC sets aside impugned order and stated that merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction.","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\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction: Jharkhand HC sets aside order dismissing S.34 arbitration application","og_description":"Jharkhand HC sets aside impugned order and stated that merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-02-18T04:30:04+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-02-20T06:36:59+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Jharkhand-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Arushi","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction: Jharkhand HC sets aside order dismissing S.34 arbitration application","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Arushi","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/","name":"Merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction: JHC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2025-02-18T04:30:04+00:00","dateModified":"2025-02-20T06:36:59+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ded7dcfe9a971ee0916ce27ee7c09c76"},"description":"Jharkhand HC sets aside impugned order and stated that merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/10\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Jharkhand High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/18\/merely-because-arbitrator-was-appointed-by-orissa-hc-is-no-ground-for-ranchi-court-to-not-have-jurisdiction-jhc\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Merely because arbitrator was appointed by Orissa HC is no ground for Ranchi Court to not have jurisdiction: Jharkhand HC sets aside order dismissing S.34 arbitration application"}]},{"@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\/10\/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":341729,"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":325875,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/06\/arbitration-round-up-june-2024-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":341729,"position":1},"title":"Arbitration Roundup June 2024; Update yourself with all the latest Arbitration law updates in June 2024","author":"Editor","date":"July 6, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cA quick recap of the latest rulings by the Supreme Court and High Courts- From the mandate of the arbitrator to the challenge of award passed by arbitrator\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Latest Arbitration laws June 2024","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/Latest-Arbitration-laws-June-2024.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/Latest-Arbitration-laws-June-2024.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/Latest-Arbitration-laws-June-2024.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/Latest-Arbitration-laws-June-2024.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":325118,"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\/","url_meta":{"origin":341729,"position":2},"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","author":"Arushi","date":"June 26, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"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 of the Bihar Cooperative Societies Act, 1935, was required to approach the Registrar of the Cooperative Societies for initiating a dispute resolution proceeding.","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\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-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\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jharkhand-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":341729,"position":3},"title":"Seat of arbitration once fixed by the arbitration agreement, has the exclusive jurisdiction for applications u\/s 11 of the A&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 "Case Briefs"","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":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":341729,"position":4},"title":"Delhi High Court appoints sole arbitrator despite clause specifying two arbitrators; Upholds parties’ 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 "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\/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":330013,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/04\/madras-hc-uphold-arbitration-award-passed-beyond-12-months-from-date-tribunal-entered-upon-reference\/","url_meta":{"origin":341729,"position":5},"title":"‘Section 29-A of Arbitration Act is procedural and discretion is given to parties to extend arbitration period further for 6 months’ ; Madras HC upholds arbitration award passed beyond 12 months","author":"Apoorva","date":"September 4, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe legislative intent of inserting Section 29-A of the Act is only for expeditious disposal of the arbitration proceedings and not to confer a new defence upon an unsuccessful party to challenge the award and to reopen the entire proceedings.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"madras high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/madras-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\/08\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/madras-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/madras-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\/341729","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=341729"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/341729\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/333852"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=341729"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=341729"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=341729"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}