Alerts & Updates

ELP Arbitration Weekly Update

Litigation, Arbitration & Dispute Resolution | Mar 12, 2019

In this week’s coverage of the latest developments in arbitration law, we take a look at the Bombay High Court’s (“High Court”) recent judgment in Meenu Arora and Ors. v. Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd.

In this case, the High Court was faced with a challenge to an arbitral award on the basis that the sole arbitrator in this case had been appointed as arbitrator by the other party more than three times in the previous three years. The High Court found that his appointment in yet another arbitration involving that party gave rise to justifiable doubts as to his independence and impartiality, and held his appointment invalid in light of Entry 22 of the Fifth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Act”) as amended in the year 2015.

The High Court also relied upon the Supreme Court’s seminal judgment in TRF Limited v. Energo Engineering Project Limited and reiterated that where the arbitrator specified in an arbitration clause becomes ineligible to act as an arbitrator, he is also ineligible to appoint any person to act in his stead, and the parties must necessarily approach the court under section 11 of the Act.

Related Articles

Alerts & Updates Litigation, Arbitration & Dispute Resolution

ELP Arbitration Weekly Update 26 September 2018

SC Rules: When a dispute resolution clause provides that...

Alerts & Updates Litigation, Arbitration & Dispute Resolution

ELP Arbitration Weekly Update 23 August 2018

In this week’s alert we update our readers on what has...

Alerts & Updates Litigation, Arbitration & Dispute Resolution

ELP Arbitration Weekly Update 13 October 2018

In this week’s update, we analyse a recent judgment of...

Alerts & Updates Litigation, Arbitration & Dispute Resolution

ELP Arbitration Update 23 August 2018

This week, we have analyzed the Bombay High Court’s...