Case Law Details
Sacheerome Advanced Technologies (SAT) Vs NEC Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (NECI) (Delhi High Court)
In the present case, the petitioner did not make any application challenging the appointment of learned Arbitrator under Section 13 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act); it filed an application styled as under Section 16 read with Section 14(1)(a) of the A&C Act. Nonetheless, in substance, the petitioner had challenged the appointment of the learned Arbitrator. The learned Arbitrator considered the said application and has since decided the same. In the circumstances, the only recourse now available to the petitioner is to proceed with the arbitral proceedings and challenge the arbitral award under Section 34 of the A&C Act, if it so desires.
The contention that Section 14 of the A&C Act provides a separate remedy available to parties to challenge appointment of an arbitrator, notwithstanding, the provisions under Section 13 of the A&C Act, is unmerited. In Progressive Career Academy Pvt. Ltd. v. FIITJEE Ltd.: 180 (2011) DLT 714, the Court had examined the UNCITRAL Model Law and noted that the Parliament had not adopted the Model Law in its entirety on the subject of impartiality of the Arbitral Tribunal. The Court had further noted that a departure from the said Model Law, indicated that the Indian Parliament did not want any curial interference at an interlocutory stage of the arbitral proceedings on the perceived ground of bias. The Court held that such a challenge would be permissible only under Section 34 of the A&C Act after the award had been rendered.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 14 (2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter ‘the A&C Act’), inter alia, praying that the mandate of the learned Sole Arbitrator be terminated.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
