Case Note & Summary
The applicant, M/s. Shanti Enterprises, a partnership firm engaged in construction, entered into a contract with the Union of India for addition/alteration works at INS Hamla. Disputes arose, and the applicant invoked the arbitration clause (Condition 70 of the GCC) by notice dated 11th February 2015. The respondent did not appoint an arbitrator. The applicant then filed an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the Bombay High Court. The court examined the arbitration agreement and found that the respondent had failed to act. The court allowed the application and appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes.
Headnote
A) Arbitration Law - Appointment of Arbitrator - Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Condition 70 of General Conditions of Contract - The applicant contractor sought appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate disputes arising out of a works contract with the Union of India. The court held that since the respondent failed to appoint an arbitrator despite notice, the applicant was entitled to appointment by the court under Section 11. (Paras 1-11)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the applicant is entitled to appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, given the arbitration agreement in Condition 70 of the General Conditions of Contract.
Final Decision
The court allowed the application and appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.
Law Points
- Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996
- Condition 70 of General Conditions of Contract
- Appointment of Arbitrator by Court when party fails to act
Case Details
2016 LawText (BOM) (12) 29
Arbitration Application No. 89 of 2015
Mr. Y. Singh i/b. Auris Legal for the Applicant, Mr. Y. Bhate i/b. Ms. Anamika Malhotra for the Respondent
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an arbitrator.
Remedy Sought
Appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes arising out of Contract Agreement No. C.A. No. CENM M-13 of 2011-12.
Filing Reason
Disputes arose between the parties under the contract; the applicant invoked the arbitration clause but the respondent failed to appoint an arbitrator.
Issues
Whether the applicant is entitled to appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Submissions/Arguments
The applicant submitted that disputes arose and they invoked arbitration by notice dated 11th February 2015, but the respondent did not appoint an arbitrator.
The respondent opposed the application, but the judgment does not specify the grounds of opposition.
Ratio Decidendi
Where an arbitration agreement exists and a party fails to appoint an arbitrator despite notice, the court may appoint an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Judgment Excerpts
The above Arbitration Application is filed by the Applicant - M/s. Shanti Enterprises against the Respondent - Union of India under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act) for appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties arising out of the Contract Agreement No. C.A. No. CENM M-13 of 2011-12 'For Addition / Alteration and Improvement to Building P / 151 ( Junior Sailors Bock 320 )at INS HAMLA.'
Procedural History
The applicant filed Arbitration Application No. 89 of 2015 under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before the Bombay High Court. The court heard the parties and passed judgment on 22nd December 2016.
Acts & Sections
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 11
- Indian Partnership Act, 1932:
