Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 14 (0.36 seconds)The Amending Act, 1897
The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996
Section 11 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 13 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Section 14 in The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 [Entire Act]
Simplex Infrastructures Ltd. vs Rail Vikas Nigam Limited on 11 December, 2018
Similarly,
he stated that the judgment as relied upon by Mr. Ritin Rai in the
case of Simplex Infrastructures Ltd. (supra) is overlooking the
distinguishing feature. Even the said judgment is distinguishable
on facts as, the respondent in the said case did not forward the
ARB.P. 167/2019 Page 9 of 25
broad-based panel before filing of the case before this Court,
unlike the case herein.
Perkins Eastman Architects Dpc vs Hscc (India) Limited on 26 November, 2019
41. It is also pertinent to note that in the case of Perkins
Eastman Architects DPC & Anr v. HSCC(India) Ltd,
2019(6)ArbLR132(SC), the Supreme Court while dealing with an
application under Section 11(6) read with 11(12)(a) of the Act of
1996, held that as per the scheme of Section 11 of Act of 1996 if
there are justifiable doubts as to the independence and
impartiality of the person nominated , and if other circumstances
warrant appointment of an independent arbitrator by ignoring the
procedure prescribed, such an appointment can be made by the
Court.
Shin Satellite Public Co. Ltd vs M/S Jain Studios Limited on 31 January, 2006
In this regard, he would rely on the judgment of the
Supreme Court in the case of Shin Sattelite Public Co. Ltd. v.
Jain Studios Ltd., (2006) 2 SCC 628.
Northn. Rly. Admn., Min.Of Railway, N.D vs Patel Engineering Company Ltd on 18 August, 2008
36. The plea taken by Mr. Anil Seth that the Court shall have
due regard to qualification requirement in the arbitration Clause
as per Section 11(8) of the Act of 1996, by relying upon
Northern Railway Administration, Ministry of Railway, New
Delhi (supra) and Union of India (supra) as well as by
distinguishing the judgment in Voestalpine Schienen GMBH
(supra) is concerned, the said plea would be unsustainable in
view of the conclusion arrived at by me in holding the arbitration
Clause as invalid. In other words, the Arbitrators of Railways
ARB.P. 167/2019 Page 21 of 25
and PSU‟s related to Railways even though possessing the said
qualification cannot meet the requirement of neutrality of the
Arbitrators and further persons having similar qualifications in
Engineering can also be available outside, the Railways / PSU‟s,
in private sector.