Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, M/S. Suresh Goel & Associates, a proprietorship concern, filed a petition under Section 11(5)(6) and 12(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes arising from a contract dated 10.04.2018 with the respondent, Indian Institute of Technology Dharwad. The contract contained an arbitration clause (Clause 2.4.7 of the General Conditions of Contract). The court, after hearing both sides, found that an arbitration agreement existed and the disputes were covered by it. The court appointed a sole arbitrator to resolve the disputes. The petition was allowed.
Headnote
A) Arbitration Law - Appointment of Arbitrator - Section 11(5)(6) and 12(b) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Petition for appointment of sole arbitrator under arbitration clause in contract - Court found existence of arbitration agreement and disputes covered - Appointed sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether an arbitrator should be appointed to adjudicate disputes arising out of a contract between the petitioner and respondent under Clause 2.4.7 of the General Conditions of Contract.
Final Decision
The court allowed the petition and appointed a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.
Law Points
- Arbitration agreement exists
- dispute covered by arbitration clause
- appointment of arbitrator under Section 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act
- 1996
Case Details
2021 LawText (KAR) (06) 7
Sri.P.B. Appaiah for Sri. Shivaraj S Balloli (for petitioner), Sri.Bidan Chandran for Sri. Shivasai M Patil, Sri. M.V. Kini, Sri. Padmanabha Holla, Sri. G. Hanumthareddy, Sri. Shashidhar T, Sri. Prashantha T, Sri. Ramesh C, Sri. Nityananda M.K. (for respondent)
M/S. Suresh Goel & Associates
Indian Institute of Technology Dharwad
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Petition for appointment of sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Remedy Sought
Appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate disputes between petitioner and respondent under Clause 2.4.7 of the General Conditions of Contract.
Filing Reason
Disputes arose out of a contract dated 10.04.2018 between the parties, and the petitioner sought arbitration as per the arbitration clause.
Issues
Whether an arbitrator should be appointed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to resolve disputes arising from the contract dated 10.04.2018.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued for appointment of arbitrator based on arbitration clause. Respondent's arguments not detailed in text.
Ratio Decidendi
The existence of an arbitration agreement and disputes covered by it justifies appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Judgment Excerpts
This is a petition filed under Section 11(5)(6) and 12(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
PRAYING TO APPOINT SUCH PERSON AS THIS HON’BLE COURT DEEMS FIT AS THE SOLE ARBITRATOR TO ADJUDICATE THE DISPUTES THAT HAVE ARISEN BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT UNDER CLAUSE 2.4.7 OF THE GENERAL CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT IN THE TECHNICAL BID SECTION OF THE CONTRACT DATED 10.04.2018
Procedural History
Petition filed under Section 11(5)(6) and 12(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Heard and reserved on 3.6.2021, order pronounced on 30.6.2021.
Acts & Sections
- Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Section 11(5), Section 11(6), Section 11(12)(b)
