ANTRIX CORP. LTD. versus DEVAS MULTIMEDIA P. LTD.

ANTRIX CORP. LTD. versus DEVAS MULTIMEDIA P. LTD.

Where in terms of the arbitration agreement the clause has already been invoked and arbitrator appointed under ICC Rules by one party, the other party cannot proceed under Section 11(6) for appointment of arbitrator. The only remedy for aggrieved parties is under Section 13 and Section 34, not Section 11(6).

Parties
Petitioner: Antrix Corporation Limited; Respondent: Devas Multimedia Private Limited
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Arbitration Petition / Original Jurisdiction, Decision on Section 11(6) Application
Outcome
Arbitration Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Appointment of Arbitrators, International Chamber of Commerce (icc) Rules, UNCITRAL Rules, Jurisdiction Under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
Arbitration Appointment of Arbitrators International Chamber of Commerce (icc) Rules UNCITRAL Rules Jurisdiction Under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

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 3 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Antrix Corporation Limited

Petitioner

Devas Multimedia Private Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Arbitration Petition / Original Jurisdiction, Decision on Section 11(6) Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 can be invoked for appointment of arbitrator when one party has already invoked the ICC Rules and constituted an arbitral tribunal.
  2. 2 Whether unilateral invocation of ICC Rules for constitution of tribunal excludes recourse to Section 11(6) for appointment of arbitrator.
  3. 3 Remedies available to a party dissatisfied with arbitrator appointed under ICC Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

Where in terms of the arbitration agreement the clause has already been invoked and arbitrator appointed under ICC Rules by one party, the other party cannot proceed under Section 11(6) for appointment of arbitrator. The only remedy for aggrieved parties is under Section 13 and Section 34, not Section 11(6).

Court Disposition

Arbitration Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Arbitration Petition No.20 of 2011 under Section 11(6) of the 1996 Act for the appointment of an Arbitrator is rejected.
  • Petitioner may take recourse to other provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appropriate relief.