Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + SC Companies Law - 2000 (8) TMI SC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2000 (8) TMI 1000 - SC - Companies LawWhat is the nature of the order that is passed by the Chief Justice or his nominee in exercise of power under sub-section (6) of section 11? Even if said order is held to be administrative in nature what is the remedy open to the person concerned if his request for appointment of an Arbitrator is turned down by the learned Chief Justice or his nominee, for some reason or other? Held that:- The nature of the function performed by the Chief Justice being essentially to aid the Constitution of the Arbitration Tribunal immediately and the Legislature having consciously chosen to confer the power on the Chief Justice and not a Court, it is apparent that the order passed by the Chief Justice or his nominee is an administrative order. This being the position even an order refusing to appoint an arbitrator will not be amenable to the jurisdiction of this Court under article 136 of the Constitution. Needless to mention such an order refusing to appoint an arbitrator after deciding the contentious issues would be an act of non-performance of duty and in view of what has been stated earlier the concerned authority could be directed by mandamus to perform its duty. We fail to understand how a petition under article 32, at all is entertainable against the order of the learned Chief Justice, refusing to appoint an arbitrator under section 11 of the 1996 Act. This petition under article 32, accordingly stands dismissed.
|