1. INTRODUCTION
It is not uncommon for parties to incorporate arbitration
clauses that give them the unilateral power to appoint a sole
arbitrator. The parties (particularly companies) do that in order
to have a greater role in constituting an arbitral tribunal as also
to expeditiously constitute an arbitral tribunal without having to
approach the courts for constituting the arbitral tribunal, which
can be a time-consuming process.
The recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Perkins Eastman
Architects DPC & Anr v. HSCC (India) Ltd ("Perkins
Eastman")1 has created quite a stir. On a rigid
reading of Perkins Eastman, arbitration clauses that give the right
to one party to appoint a sole arbitrator, would no longer be
valid. A more recent judgment of the Bombay High Court in Lite Bite
Foods Pvt Ltd v. Airports Authority of India2 (the
"Lite case") has followed Perkins Eastman. However, in
certain other instances, the courts have respected party autonomy
in
