M/S SHREE RAM MILLS LTD. versus M/S UTILITY PREMISES (P) LTD .

M/S SHREE RAM MILLS LTD. versus M/S UTILITY PREMISES (P) LTD .

If the Chief Justice comes to a finding that a live dispute exists between the parties, arbitration proceedings may be initiated. Determination of whether claims are barred by limitation or affected by settlement should be referred to the arbitral tribunal, not decided conclusively at the stage of appointment under Section 11(6).

Parties
Appellant: M/S Shree Ram Mills Ltd.; Respondent: M/S Utility Premises (P) Ltd.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 March 2007
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Decision on Arbitration Petition Under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by Bombay High Court
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appointment of Arbitrator, Existence of Live Dispute, Limitation for Arbitration, Effect of Settlement/mo U
Arbitration Appointment of Arbitrator Existence of Live Dispute Limitation for Arbitration Effect of Settlement/mo U

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M/S Shree Ram Mills Ltd.

Appellant

M/S Utility Premises (P) Ltd.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Decision on Arbitration Petition Under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by Bombay High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a live issue or dispute between the parties permitting appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6)
  2. 2 Whether the claim of the respondent is barred by limitation
  3. 3 Effect of the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) and whether respondent could repudiate it and invoke arbitration

Ratio Decidendi

If the Chief Justice comes to a finding that a live dispute exists between the parties, arbitration proceedings may be initiated. Determination of whether claims are barred by limitation or affected by settlement should be referred to the arbitral tribunal, not decided conclusively at the stage of appointment under Section 11(6).

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Arbitrator appointed under Section 11(6) remains valid
  • Question of limitation and effect of MoU to be decided by Arbitral Tribunal