Supreme Court Appoints Sole Arbitrator in Arbitration Dispute Clarifying Number of Arbitrators. The court determined that the arbitration clause's silence on the number of arbitrators necessitated the appointment of a sole arbitrator under Section 10(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

  • 1
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Supreme Court addressed a petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by a Malaysian company seeking the appointment of an arbitral tribunal to resolve disputes with an Indian company. The disputes arose from a subcontract related to a project awarded by Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited (ONGC) for offshore work. The petitioner claimed unpaid dues amounting to over $14 million and invoked the arbitration clause in February 2008. The respondent contested the invocation, suggesting that arbitration was premature and proposed a joint settlement mechanism. However, both parties eventually acknowledged the existence of arbitrable disputes. The core legal issue revolved around whether the arbitration should be conducted by a sole arbitrator or a panel of three arbitrators. The petitioner argued for a sole arbitrator based on the silence of the arbitration clause regarding the number of arbitrators, while the respondent contended that the clause implied a panel of three. The court analyzed the arbitration clause and relevant provisions of the Act, concluding that the absence of a specified number of arbitrators in the clause necessitated the appointment of a sole arbitrator under Section 10(2). The court appointed Justice D.P. Wadhwa as the sole arbitrator and directed him to resolve the dispute expeditiously, preferably within six months. The petition was allowed without costs.

Headnote

A) Arbitration Law - Composition of Arbitral Tribunal - Number of Arbitrators - Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 10 - The court held that in the absence of a clear determination of the number of arbitrators in the arbitration clause, the tribunal shall consist of a sole arbitrator as per Section 10(2) of the Act. The court emphasized that the silence in the arbitration clause regarding the number of arbitrators leads to the application of the statutory provision, thus appointing a sole arbitrator. (Paras 27-32).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the arbitration clause allows for a sole arbitrator or requires a panel of three arbitrators.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court appointed Justice D.P. Wadhwa as the sole arbitrator and directed him to resolve the dispute within six months. The petition was allowed without costs.

Law Points

  • Arbitration
  • Sole Arbitrator
  • Arbitration Clause
  • UNCITRAL Rules
  • Section 10 Arbitration and Conciliation Act
  • 1996
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2009 LawText (SC) (07) 188

Arbitration Petition No.3 of 2009

2009-07-22

Asok Kumar Ganguly

Sime Darby Engineering SDN. BHD.

Engineers India Ltd.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Petition for appointment of an arbitral tribunal under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought the appointment of a sole arbitrator to resolve disputes.

Filing Reason

Disputes arose from a subcontract related to an ONGC project, with claims of unpaid dues.

Issues

Determination of the number of arbitrators Validity of arbitration clause

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued for a sole arbitrator based on the silence of the arbitration clause. Respondent contended for a panel of three arbitrators citing the arbitration clause and policy decisions.

Ratio Decidendi

In the absence of a clear specification in the arbitration clause regarding the number of arbitrators, Section 10(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 mandates the appointment of a sole arbitrator.

Judgment Excerpts

This petition has been filed under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. The parties shall endeavour to resolve any dispute or difference amicably through joint negotiation. The court emphasized that the silence in the arbitration clause regarding the number of arbitrators leads to the application of the statutory provision.

Procedural History

The petition was filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking the appointment of an arbitral tribunal. The matter was heard regarding the number of arbitrators to be appointed.

Acts & Sections

  • Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 10
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Revenue's Appeal in Sales Tax Case on Handling Charges. Handling charges for registration of motor cycles are not part of sale price under Section 2(25) of MVAT Act, 2002.
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal Regarding Retrospective Rule-Making Power. The court held that the State Government lacked authority to make retrospective rules under Section 4(2) of the Andhra Pradesh Motor Vehicles (Taxation of Passengers and Goods)...