Bombay High Court Allows Arbitration Petition in Commercial Dispute — Appointment of Arbitrator Directed. Court holds that existence of arbitration clause and failure of respondent to appoint arbitrator entitles petitioner to seek appointment under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 60
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Carol Info Services Ltd., filed a Commercial Arbitration Petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate disputes arising from a commercial agreement with the respondent, Shinhan Bank. The agreement contained an arbitration clause. The petitioner invoked the arbitration clause and requested the respondent to appoint an arbitrator, but the respondent failed to do so. Consequently, the petitioner approached the High Court. The court, after hearing the parties, found that the arbitration clause existed and the respondent had not appointed an arbitrator. The court allowed the petition and appointed a sole arbitrator to resolve the disputes. The court also disposed of the interim application. The decision was based on the provisions of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Headnote

A) Arbitration Law - Appointment of Arbitrator - Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Existence of Arbitration Clause - The dispute arose from a commercial agreement containing an arbitration clause. The petitioner invoked the clause and requested the respondent to appoint an arbitrator, but the respondent failed to do so. The court held that the petitioner is entitled to appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Act, as the conditions for such appointment were satisfied. (Paras 1-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, given the existence of an arbitration clause and the respondent's failure to appoint an arbitrator.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the Commercial Arbitration Petition and appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. The interim application was also disposed of.

Law Points

  • Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
  • 1996
  • Appointment of arbitrator
  • Existence of arbitration clause
  • Failure to appoint arbitrator
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2025 LawText (BOM) (11) 5

CARBPL.27416.2024 with Interim Application (L) No. 27569 of 2024

0000-00-00

SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN

Mr. Zal Andhyarujina, Senior Counsel a/w Shruti Sardessai, Vishal Maheshwari & Kamini Pansare for the Petitioner; Mr. Chetan Kapadia, Senior Advocate a/w Amir Arsiwala, Yuvraj Singh, Omprakash Jha, Shivani Kumbhojkar & Siddhant Trivedi, i/b The Law Point for Respondent

Carol Info Services Ltd.

Shinhan Bank

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

Nature of Litigation

Commercial Arbitration Petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an arbitrator.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate disputes arising from a commercial agreement.

Filing Reason

Respondent failed to appoint an arbitrator despite invocation of arbitration clause by petitioner.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the agreement contained an arbitration clause and respondent failed to appoint an arbitrator. Respondent's arguments not mentioned.

Ratio Decidendi

The existence of an arbitration clause and the failure of the respondent to appoint an arbitrator entitles the petitioner to seek appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Judgment Excerpts

The court allowed the petition and appointed a sole arbitrator.

Procedural History

Petitioner filed Commercial Arbitration Petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Interim application was also filed. The court heard the matter and passed the order.

Acts & Sections

  • Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 11
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Court Fee Order in Suit for Declaration that Sale Deed is Null and Void. Court held that a plaintiff who is not the executant of a sale deed and does not seek possession is not liable to pay ad valor...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Seeking Reduction of Punishment from Removal to Reversion in Disciplinary Matter. Petitioner's challenge to rejection of representation for reduction of punishment fails as court finds no grounds to interfere...