Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (1.94 seconds)
Sattar Ali Khan vs Yes Bank Ltd on 9 May, 2023 cites

Proddatur Cable Tv Digi Services vs Siti Cable Network Limited on 20 January, 2020

In view of the judgment Bharat Broadband Sattar Ali Khan Vs. Yes Bank Ltd. Page No. 18 of 39 OMP (COMM) NO. 25/19 Network Ltd. (supra), it can be held that section 12(5) of the Act provides that notwithstanding any prior agreement to the contrary, the moment any person whose relationship with the parties or the counsel or the subject-matter of the dispute falls under the 7th Schedule, such person shall be "ineligible" to be appointed as arbitrator. The only way in which this ineligibility can be removed is by the proviso to section 12(5) of the Act. The requirement presumes that the agreement in writing must be made by the party who takes the objection to the appointment of the arbitrator and seeks recourse under section 12 (5). The requirement does not entail both the parties executing a formal agreement since the other party (who has made the appointment) may not raise the issue at all.Therefore, where an arbitrator becomes "ineligible" to be appointed as an arbitrator, a case which falls under section 12(5), section 14(1)(a) of the Act gets attracted as the arbitrator becomes, as a matter of law (i.e. de jure), unable to perform his functions under section 12(5). If an arbitrator continues as such, being de jure unable to perform his functions, as he falls within any of the categories mentioned in Section 12(5), read with the 7 th Schedule, a party may apply to the Court, which will then decide on whether his mandate has terminated.
Delhi High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 250 - J Singh - Full Document
1   2 Next