ARAVALI POWER COMPANY PVT. LTD. versus MIS. ERA INFRA ENGINEERING LTD.

ARAVALI POWER COMPANY PVT. LTD. versus MIS. ERA INFRA ENGINEERING LTD.

Appointment of an employee arbitrator, who is not the controlling or dealing authority nor a subordinate to the officer whose decision is in dispute, is not invalid or unenforceable in pre-amendment cases. Respondent participated in arbitration without challenging under prescribed legal procedure. High Court erred in exercising jurisdiction and interfering with the process; arbitration should proceed as per contract and law.

Parties
Appellant: Aravali Power Company Pvt. Ltd.; Respondent: M/s. ERA Infra Engineering Ltd.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
12 September 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order Under Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
Outcome
Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside for appellant and dismissed for respondent.
Legal Topics
Appointment of Arbitrator, Independence and Impartiality of Arbitrator, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 S.11(6), S.12, S.13, Pre and Post 2015 Amendment Cases
Arbitration Appointment of Arbitrator Independence and Impartiality of Arbitrator Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 S.11(6), S.12, S.13 Pre and Post 2015 Amendment Cases

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aravali Power Company Pvt. Ltd.

Appellant

M/s. ERA Infra Engineering Ltd.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against High Court Order Under Section 11(6) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether appointment of an employee as sole arbitrator before the 2015 Amendment is invalid or unenforceable
  2. 2 Whether the High Court was correct in setting aside the appointment and appointing an independent arbitrator under Section 11(6)

Ratio Decidendi

Appointment of an employee arbitrator, who is not the controlling or dealing authority nor a subordinate to the officer whose decision is in dispute, is not invalid or unenforceable in pre-amendment cases. Respondent participated in arbitration without challenging under prescribed legal procedure. High Court erred in exercising jurisdiction and interfering with the process; arbitration should proceed as per contract and law.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside for appellant and dismissed for respondent.

Orders

  • Arbitration pursuant to the appointment of the Arbitrator on 19.08.2015 shall proceed in accordance with law.
  • No order as to costs.