9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Appointment of a single arbitrator by the civil court. 2. Delay in arbitration proceedings by the panel of 3 arbitrators. 3. Participation of the petitioner-State in the arbitration proceedings before the sole arbitrator. 4. Validity of the final award made by the sole arbitrator. Analysis: 1. The respondent-contractor executed works based on an agreement with an arbitration clause involving a panel of 3 arbitrators. A dispute arose, leading to the respondent applying to the civil court for a single arbitrator appointment. The court, against the objections of the petitioner-State, removed the panel and appointed a retired Chief Engineer as the sole arbitrator. The High Court upheld this decision, leading to the petitioner challenging it further. 2. The parties' counsels argued over the delay caused by the panel of 3 arbitrators and the propriety of appointing a single arbitrator. The petitioner contended that a panel should have been appointed as per the agreement's provisions, with the specific incumbents mentioned. The court found it unnecessary to determine if the arbitrators had delayed unduly, deciding to entrust the arbitration matter to the mentioned incumbents instead. 3. The respondent raised an objection regarding the petitioner's participation in the arbitration proceedings before the sole arbitrator, highlighting a final award had been made. The petitioner explained that the objection was unfounded, as they had promptly filed a special leave petition due to the arbitrator's insistence on proceeding. The objection was rejected, and special leave was granted. 4. After closely examining the matter, the court directed the trial court to refer the dispute to the mentioned incumbents for arbitration, emphasizing cooperation for an expedited conclusion. The previous orders were set aside, rendering the award made by the sole arbitrator invalid. The appeal was allowed with no costs imposed, ensuring a fresh arbitration process with the designated officials.
|
