Alerts & Updates 9th Dec 2019
This week, we analyze the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Union of India v. Pradeep Vinod Construction Company and Union of India v. BM Construction Company. The Supreme Court collectively heard the appeals arising from the judgment of the Delhi High Court in petitions filed under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The arbitration clauses provided that the arbitral tribunal shall consist of a sole arbitrator “..who shall be a Gazetted Officer of Railway not below JA Grade, nominated by the General Manager”. The issue which arose before the Supreme Court was whether the court ought to appoint the named arbitrator as per the contract or an independent arbitrator in an application under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, when the arbitration proceedings were initiated prior to the coming into force of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015.
The Supreme Court ruled out the applicability of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015, and held that when the agreement specifically stipulates for the appointment of a named arbitrator, the appointment should be in terms of the agreement. Trust you will find this an interesting read.
As per the rules of the Bar Council of India, lawyers and law firms are not permitted to solicit work or advertise. By clicking on the "I Agree" button, you acknowledge and confirm that you are seeking information relating to Economic Laws Practice (ELP) of your own accord and there has been no advertisement, personal communication, solicitation, invitation or any other inducement of any sort whatsoever by or on behalf of ELP or any of its members to solicit any work through this website.