Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Shailesh H. Kulkarni, filed a Misc. Civil Application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking directions against the Union of India and other railway authorities. The application originally contained three clauses, but clauses (i) and (ii) were declared infructuous as the party had appeared before the Tribunal and an award was already passed. The only surviving prayer was clause (iii), seeking compensation of Rs.5,00,000 for mental and physical harassment caused by the respondent's insensitive attitude leading to inordinate delay in the arbitration proceedings. The Court, after hearing both sides, observed that the designate Judge under Section 11 has no jurisdiction to adjudicate such issues. The scheme and purpose of Section 11 is limited to appointment of arbitrators and does not extend to awarding compensation or costs. The Court dismissed the application, keeping all points open for the applicant to pursue elsewhere, and made no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Arbitration Law - Jurisdiction of Designate Judge under Section 11 - Compensation and Costs - The applicant sought compensation of Rs.5,00,000 for inordinate delay in arbitration due to respondent's insensitive attitude - The Court held that the scheme and purpose of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not confer jurisdiction on the designate Judge to adjudicate such claims - The remedy lies elsewhere - Application dismissed with no order as to costs (Paras 4-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can grant compensation and costs for alleged delay caused by the respondent in arbitration proceedings.
Final Decision
The Misc. Civil Application is dismissed. No order as to costs. All points kept open.
Law Points
- Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996
- Designate Judge's jurisdiction limited to appointment of arbitrator
- No power to award compensation or costs
Case Details
2013 LawText (BOM) (06) 100
MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION (ARBITRATION) NO.409/2012
Mr. Shriniwas Deshpande for petitioner, Mr. N.P. Lambat for respondents 1 to 3
Shri Shailesh H. Kulkarni
The Union of India, The General Manager, South East Central Railway, The Divisional Railway Manager (Engineering), South East Central Railway, Shri R.S. Poonia, Shri Venkata Reddy, Shri A.K. Gupta
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Misc. Civil Application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking compensation for delay in arbitration proceedings.
Remedy Sought
Applicant sought direction to respondents to pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000 for inordinate delay caused in arbitration due to respondent's insensitive attitude, and action against officers.
Filing Reason
Alleged inordinate delay in arbitration proceedings due to respondent's insensitive attitude causing mental and physical harassment.
Previous Decisions
Clauses (i) and (ii) of the application were declared infructuous as the party appeared before the Tribunal and award was already passed.
Issues
Whether the High Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can grant compensation and costs for alleged delay caused by the respondent in arbitration proceedings.
Submissions/Arguments
Applicant's counsel submitted that respondents should be directed to pay compensation of Rs.5,00,000 for inordinate delay due to insensitive attitude causing mental and physical harassment.
Respondents' counsel agreed that clauses (i) and (ii) were infructuous.
Ratio Decidendi
The scheme and purpose of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not confer jurisdiction on the designate Judge to adjudicate claims for compensation or costs; such remedy lies elsewhere.
Judgment Excerpts
Considering the scheme and purpose of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and as the designate Judge has no jurisdiction to adjudicate all these issues, there is no question of granting any relief, as prayed.
The Misc. Civil Application is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Procedural History
The applicant filed Misc. Civil Application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Clauses (i) and (ii) became infructuous as award was passed. Only clause (iii) for compensation remained. Heard and dismissed on 28.06.2013.
Acts & Sections
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 11
