Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 07 JANUARY 2020

Considerations That Weigh With Court While Appointing Arbitrator Under Section 11 Of The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996

In yet another decision, reversing the judgement of Delhi High Court, the Supreme Court held that once parties consciously and with full understanding executed an amendment of agreement

IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in its recent judgment1 set aside a judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh rejecting an application for appointment of arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Act") on the ground that claims of the petitioner- contractor were barred by limitation. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that after the 2015 amendments to the Act, court is only required to examine the existence of arbitration agreement. All other preliminary or threshold issues are to be decided by the arbitral tribunal under Section 16 of the Act.

In yet another decision2 , reversing the judgement of Delhi High Court, the Supreme Court held that once parties consciously and with full understanding executed an amendment of agreement ("AOA"), whereby the contractor gave up all his claims and consented to the new arrangement specified in AOA including that there will be no arbitration for the settlement of any claims by the contractor

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from