As per section 11(2) parties can agree the appointing of arbitrator and in the absence of such agreement section 11(3) to be followed


Last updated: 20 November 2012

Court :
Supreme Court of India

Brief :
These appeals have raised the question about the procedure that is being followed by Calcutta High Court in consideration of the applications under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, ‘1996 Act’). When the special leave petition filed by M/s. Choudhury Construction came up for consideration before the Bench, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the procedure adopted by the Designate Judge while hearing petition under Section 11 of 1996 Act was unknown in law and not sanctioned by Section 11 inasmuch as although the Designate Judge has held that there are live disputes between the parties which have to be resolved through arbitration, yet the matter has been ordered to be placed before the Chief Justice for appointment of the arbitrator. In light of the submission made by the learned counsel, Registrar General, Calcutta High Court was ordered to be impleaded as party respondent.

Citation :
Hindustan Copper Ltd. …… Appellant Vs.Monarch Gold Mining Co. Ltd. …… Respondent

You have reached daily limit of 2 Free Judgements. To view this or other Judgements please subscribe to CCI PRO :

GST Plus

Stay updated! Stay ads free

Browse CAclubindia ads free.
Latest updates on WA.
Daily E-Newsletter and much more.

CCI PRO annual subscription :

Original Price : INR 2999/-

Offer Price : INR 1999/-

Duration : 1 year
(Prices Inclusive of GST)


Know More

Note: If you are a PRO member already, please click here to login (for ad free experience)
 

CCI Pro

CS Bijoy
Published in Income Tax
Views : 1353

Comments

CAclubindia's WhatsApp Groups Link


CCI Pro
Meet our CAclubindia PRO Members


Follow us