{"id":367145,"date":"2025-11-19T12:30:57","date_gmt":"2025-11-19T07:00:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=367145"},"modified":"2025-11-24T10:40:32","modified_gmt":"2025-11-24T05:10:32","slug":"delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/","title":{"rendered":"‘Letter consenting to unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator doesn’t constitute waiver under Sec. 12 (5) of Arbitration Act’: Delhi HC"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> In a petition filed under Section 34<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (‘Act’) challenging an interim award dated 6-9-2019 (‘impugned award’) wherein the Arbitral Tribunal dismissed the prayer of the petitioner for impleadment of Respondent 2, the Single Judge Bench of Amit Bansal, J, held that a letter consenting to the unilateral appointment of a sole arbitrator does not amount to waiver under Section 12(5)<\/a> of the Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Thus, the Court held the appointment of the sole arbitrator to be void ab initio and set aside the impugned award.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The petitioner, Alpro Industries is a partnership firm engaged in the promotion of aluminum doors, windows and façade works. In 2014, Respondent 1, Ambience Pvt. Ltd., and the petitioner had entered into a contract for supply and installation of a glass façade system at the NH-8 Commercial Tower Project, Ambience Island, Gurgaon. Through subsequent amendments, the scope of work was expanded and the payment terms were modified accordingly.<\/p>\n

The petitioner had invoked arbitration proceedings in 2018. Pursuant to the notice of invocation of arbitration proceedings, Respondent 1 had appointed the sole arbitrator in terms of Clause 23 of the contract. Respondent 1 had raised the preliminary issue that Respondent 2 was not a party to the arbitration agreement and need not be impleaded.<\/p>\n

Vide the impugned award, the Arbitral Tribunal had held that no arbitration agreement existed between the petitioner and Respondent 2. The Tribunal had further observed that it lacked the jurisdiction to extend the scope of the arbitration clause and had accordingly declined the petitioner’s prayer to implead Respondent 2.<\/p>\n

The instant petition had been filed seeking setting aside of the impugned award on the ground of unilateral appointment of the arbitrator by Respondent 1 in absence of an express agreement in writing, waiving the requirement under proviso to Section 12(5)<\/a> of the Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

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

The Court noted that the arbitration clause in the contract between the parties evidently provided for a unilateral appointment of arbitrator. The issue for consideration was whether there was a waiver on behalf of the petitioner in terms of proviso to Section 12(5)<\/a> of the Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The Court referred to the case of Bharat Broadband Network Ltd.<\/span> v. United Telecoms Ltd.<\/span>, (2019) 5 SCC 755<\/a>, wherein the Supreme Court had emphasized that the agreement between the parties must be with the full knowledge that the arbitrator is ineligible to appointed as an arbitrator and yet the parties have full faith and confidence in him to continue as an arbitrator.<\/p>\n

The Court also referred to the case of Mahavir Prasad Gupta<\/span> v. GNCTD<\/span>, 2025 SCC OnLine Del 4241<\/a> (‘Mahavir Case’) wherein the Division Bench of the Court had held that an arbitration agreement providing for unilateral appointment of a sole arbitrator is a nullity and cannot be enforced. Additionally, the waiver under Section 12(5) must be express and in writing. The ineligibility of a unilaterally appointed sole arbitrator can be waived only by an express agreement in writing between the parties.<\/p>\n

Applying the ratio of the aforementioned case to the facts at hand, the Court observed that a letter sent by the petitioner, consenting to the appointment of a sole arbitrator, would not constitute a waiver for the purposes of Section 12(5)<\/a> of the Act<\/a>. At best, it would constitute a conditional acceptance of the appointment of a sole arbitrator.<\/p>\n

The Court further noted that the Mahavir Case also clarified that the issue of unilateral appointment of an arbitrator is a fundamental issue which goes to the root of the matter and can be examined by the Court suo moto at any stage.<\/p>\n

Thus, the Court held that since the appointment of the sole arbitrator was invalid an there was no express waiver in writing in terms of the proviso to Section 12(5)<\/a> of the Act<\/a>, the impugned award was liable to be set aside.<\/p>\n

[Alpro Industries v. Ambience Pvt. Ltd., 2025 SCC OnLine Del 8373<\/a>, decided on 14-11-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

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

For the Petitioner:<\/span> Kirtiman Singh, Senior Advocate, Ajay Singh, Amit Kumar, Vivek Kumar Singh, Animesh Mishra, Mohak Gulati, Maulik Khurana, Advocates<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> P. K. Agrawal, Akshay Chitkara, Sanjoli Gupta, Sudhir Bisla, Advocates<\/p>\n

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

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

“At best, the letter consenting to appointment of sole arbitrator, was a conditional acceptance of the appointment of a sole arbitrator. The condition being that the sole arbitrator would adjudicate the disputes between the petitioner and both the respondents.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":367148,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[40741,2543,70893,92962,31135,47527,30458],"class_list":["post-367145","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-justice-amit-bansal","tag-section-125-of-the-arbitration-and-conciliation-act","tag-sole-arbitrator","tag-unilateral-appointment","tag-waiver"],"yoast_head":"\nDelhi HC on validity of unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court held that a letter consenting to the unilateral appointment of a sole arbitrator does not amount to waiver under the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.\" \/>\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\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"'Letter consenting to unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator doesn't constitute waiver under Sec. 12 (5) of Arbitration Act': Delhi HC\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court held that a letter consenting to the unilateral appointment of a sole arbitrator does not amount to waiver under the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/\" \/>\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=\"2025-11-19T07:00:57+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-11-24T05:10:32+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.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=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"'Letter consenting to unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator doesn't constitute waiver under Sec. 12 (5) of Arbitration Act': 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=\"4 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\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Editor\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"headline\":\"‘Letter consenting to unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator doesn’t constitute waiver under Sec. 12 (5) of Arbitration Act’: Delhi HC\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-11-19T07:00:57+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-11-24T05:10:32+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":710,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp\",\"keywords\":[\"Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996\",\"Delhi High Court\",\"Justice Amit Bansal\",\"Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act\",\"Sole Arbitrator\",\"Unilateral Appointment\",\"waiver\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Case Briefs\",\"High Courts\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/\",\"name\":\"Delhi HC on validity of unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-11-19T07:00:57+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-11-24T05:10:32+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court held that a letter consenting to the unilateral appointment of a sole arbitrator does not amount to waiver under the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2025\\\/11\\\/19\\\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"‘Letter consenting to unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator doesn’t constitute waiver under Sec. 12 (5) of Arbitration Act’: 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":"Delhi HC on validity of unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator | SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court held that a letter consenting to the unilateral appointment of a sole arbitrator does not amount to waiver under the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.","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\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"'Letter consenting to unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator doesn't constitute waiver under Sec. 12 (5) of Arbitration Act': Delhi HC","og_description":"Delhi High Court held that a letter consenting to the unilateral appointment of a sole arbitrator does not amount to waiver under the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-11-19T07:00:57+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-11-24T05:10:32+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"'Letter consenting to unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator doesn't constitute waiver under Sec. 12 (5) of Arbitration Act': Delhi HC","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/"},"author":{"name":"Editor","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"headline":"‘Letter consenting to unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator doesn’t constitute waiver under Sec. 12 (5) of Arbitration Act’: Delhi HC","datePublished":"2025-11-19T07:00:57+00:00","dateModified":"2025-11-24T05:10:32+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/"},"wordCount":710,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp","keywords":["Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996","Delhi High Court","Justice Amit Bansal","Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act","Sole Arbitrator","Unilateral Appointment","waiver"],"articleSection":["Case Briefs","High Courts"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/","name":"Delhi HC on validity of unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp","datePublished":"2025-11-19T07:00:57+00:00","dateModified":"2025-11-24T05:10:32+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Delhi High Court held that a letter consenting to the unilateral appointment of a sole arbitrator does not amount to waiver under the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/19\/delhi-hc-on-validity-of-unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"‘Letter consenting to unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator doesn’t constitute waiver under Sec. 12 (5) of Arbitration Act’: 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\/2025\/11\/unilateral-appointment-of-sole-arbitrator.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":355319,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/del-hc-on-invalidity-of-unilateral-arbitrator-appointment\/","url_meta":{"origin":367145,"position":0},"title":"Delhi High Court: Unilateral arbitrator appointment invalid without express written waiver under Section 12(5) of Arbitration Act","author":"Niyati","date":"August 1, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe waiver under Section 4 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 will be inapplicable to the unilateral appointments as it is governed by Section 12(5), which specifically provides for waiver by express agreement in writing.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Unilateral Arbitrator Appointment","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Unilateral-Arbitrator-Appointment.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Unilateral-Arbitrator-Appointment.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Unilateral-Arbitrator-Appointment.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Unilateral-Arbitrator-Appointment.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":287070,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/17\/arbitration-petition-calcutta-high-court-appointment-arbitrator-disqualification-section-12-seventh-schedule-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996-legal-research-news-scc-online-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":367145,"position":1},"title":"All unilateral appointments of arbitrators are not invalid: Calcutta High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"March 17, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court held that all the unilateral appointment of arbitrators is not invalid unless the arbitrator's relationship falls within the Seventh Schedule to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.","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\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-604.jpg?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-604.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-604.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-604.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":263645,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/14\/a-critical-study-of-unilateral-appointment-of-arbitrators-under-the-arbitration-act-1996\/","url_meta":{"origin":367145,"position":2},"title":"To Appoint or Not to Appoint : A Critical Study of Unilateral Appointment of Arbitrators under the Arbitration Act, 1996","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 14, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"A Critical Study of Unilateral Appointment of Arbitrators under the Arbitration Act, 1996","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Arbitration_OP.ED_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Arbitration_OP.ED_.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Arbitration_OP.ED_.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Arbitration_OP.ED_.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/Arbitration_OP.ED_.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"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":367145,"position":3},"title":"Delhi Court sets aside ₹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 "Case Briefs"","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":250101,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/21\/appointment-of-arbitrator\/","url_meta":{"origin":367145,"position":4},"title":"Del HC | Can sole arbitrator’s appointment be disputed if he was consultant\/advisor to one of the parties to dispute? Court examines","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 21, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: J.R. Midha, J., in view of serious doubts on the independence of sole arbitrator as named in the arbitration agreement, appointed another independent arbitrator. Petitioner sought appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Parties had agreed for reference of disputes to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Alternate Dispute Resolution"","block_context":{"text":"Alternate Dispute Resolution","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/alternate_dispute_resolution\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":255630,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/16\/unilateral-appointment\/","url_meta":{"origin":367145,"position":5},"title":"What is the Appropriate Stage to Challenge Unilateral Appointment","author":"Editor","date":"October 16, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Ramkishore Karanam*and Mahasweta M.**","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-101-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-101-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-101-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-101-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-101-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/367145","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=367145"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/367145\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/367148"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=367145"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=367145"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=367145"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}