Case Law Details
Hemlata Jain W/O Deepak Kumar Jain Vs Padmavati Analkumar Mishra W/O Late Anala Kumar Mishra (Gujarat High Court)
Gujarat High Court held that notice invoking arbitration clause issued under section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 doesn’t require that the nature of dispute has to be enumerated or explained in the notice.
Facts- On account of certain disputes having arisen between partners in respect of the Partnership Deed, a notice was being issued by the second respondent to petitioner for settling the dispute and differences amicably. Under the said notice, second respondent had indicated that the parties should express their intention within 15 days to settle the above disputes and differences. On account of there being no such settlement arrived at, petitioner got issued a notice invoking the arbitration clause referred to in the Partnership Deed by nominating Mr.Abhishek Kukkar as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute and differences which had arisen between parties under the Partnership Deed and sought for the concurrence of the respondents namely other partners of the firm. On account of there being no concurrence and averments made in the notice having been denied by respondent Nos.1 and 3, petitioner has approached this Court for appointment of an arbitrator.
Conclusion- Held that the notice invoking arbitration clause issued under Section 21 of the Act being vague or bereft of material particulars would not be a ground on which the prayer sought for appointment of an arbitrator under sub-section (6) of Section 11 of the Act can be rejected.
A plain reading of the provision of section 21 does not even remotely suggests that the nature of dispute has to be enumerated or explained in the notice so issued seeking for the dispute being referred to arbitral tribunal. In the instant case, a notice has been issued by petitioner would indicate that petitioner is seeking for resolution of the dispute arising under the Partnership Agreement dated 10.12.2018. Thus, it would be open for the parties to raise their claim or counter-claim as the case may be before the Arbitral Tribunal and there being notice seeking for reference to the Arbitral Tribunal, present notice would fall within the four corners of notice for arbitration as required under Section 21. In that view of the matter, second contention of the petitioner also falls to ground.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
