Shaikh Rizwan Shaikh Usman Qureshi vs Mirza Abul Qais Sharfuddin Baig on 16 April, 2024
8. This Court in passing the said order was well aware of the
pre-requirement of mediation / conciliation. Further, this Court had
though holding that the process under Clause XXI of the Deed of
Partnership had been duly followed, kept the rights and contentions
of the parties including the contentions of the Respondent as to lack
of jurisdiction of the Arbitrator expressly open to be raised before the
Arbitrator appointed by this Court. Thus, if the Applicant herein was
at all aggrieved by the said Order dated 25 th October, 2023 remedies
were available to the Applicant. However, this Application for
5/6
::: Uploaded on - 22/04/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 28/04/2024 22:30:32 :::
16-IA(L) 32789.2023 in ARP 187.2023.doc
recall / review of the said order is in my view thoroughly
misconceived, particularly considering Section 5 of the Arbitration
Act and the decision of this Court in Madhav Structural Engineering
Ltd. Mumbai (supra). The court does not have the power to review
orders passed under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act as no express
power of review has been conferred on the Section 11 Court by the
Arbitration Act. Further, the Application cannot be considered as one
for recall of the said order, considering that the said order was passed
within the jurisdiction exercised by the Court under Section 11 of the
Arbitration Act for referring the dispute to arbitration and the
affected party was given full opportunity of hearing.