Can you file Section 11(6) Petition in HC at State-A when the claimant has previously filed Section 9 Petition in State-B?

-




Shubham Budhiraja[1]

A and B enters into a contract wherein dispute arose and A filed section 9 petition at Court at Vishakhapatnam seeking injunction against bank guarantee and forfeiture of security deposit and same was allowed. Thereafter, A sent letter to B seeking appointment of arbitrator and arbitrator was appointed by A. B questioned the validity of appointment and filed Section 11(6) petition in High Court of Orissa. A opposed the application relying upon section 42 of the act stating section 11(6) should have lied before High Court of Andhra Pradesh because section 9 petition was filed at Vishakhapatnam. However, High Court of Orissa allowed section 11(6) and appointed the arbitrator. Hon’ble Supreme Court setting aside the High Court order held that in that view of the matter considering Section 42 of the Arbitration Act, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh alone   would   have   jurisdiction   to   decide   the   subsequent applications   arising   out   of   the   Contract   Agreement   and   the further arbitral proceedings shall have to be made in the High court of Andhra Pradesh alone and in no other[2].


[1] Advocate, Delhi High Court , Budhirajalawchambers@gmail.com

[2] General Manager East Coast  Railway Rail Sadan & Anr v. Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4747 of 2022, Judgment dated 22/07/2022

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Whether a person can be appointed as an arbitrator if his daughter is married to the son of the eldest brother of one of the parties in the arbitration proceedings?

-
Image
    Shubham Budhiraja [1] Two brothers running a family business in the form of a company and dispute arise between them and both decide to resolve through arbitration. During course of arbitration proceedings, one of party filed Section 14(2) r/w Section 15 Petition filed challenging mandate of arbitrator as being terminated because son of arbitrator is married to daughter of eldest brother of one of party and thus should be disqualified under Section 12(5) being ‘close family relationship’. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court declined the relief and held that neither the Seventh Schedule of the A&C Act nor the IBA Guidelines define the expression ‘close family relationship’. The plain language of Entry no. 9 indicates that it is not the legislative intent to render a distant relative of the parties to be ineligible for being appointed as an arbitrator, if both the parties so agree. It is not sufficient that the arbitrator is related to any one of the parties; the relationship must
Read more

ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE: THE UNFERTILE CROP

-
Image
ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE: THE UNFERTILE CROP SHUBHAM BUDHIRAJA [1] Digital images are no different from the droplets of rain that fall, merge, and then divide: there is no telling whether the droplets that split are identical to the droplets that came together to form the larger droplet [2] . INTRODUCTION Law may be divided into substantive and procedural laws. The laws by which rights, duties and liabilities are defined are called substantive law whereas laws which prescribe mode by which application of substantive law is regulated are called procedural law. Law of Evidence is a judicial recognition to the system of logical reasoning. The Indian Evidence act, 1872 is a bunch of 167 sections divided into 11 chapters and 3 parts. Part II, Chapter V is headed as “of Documentary Evidence” is of relevance for our discussion in this article. At the threshold, it is submitted that the proving of oral evidence are in contrast to the proving of documentary
Read more

REPUGANCY UNDER ARTICLE 254 & TEST OF VALIDATING LAW

-
Image
  Shubham Budhiraja [1] [1] Company Secretary, LLB Final Year,DU & Bcom (H) The land acquisition falls in concurrent list and parliament in year 2013 has introduced a new act which provides for rehabilitation, compensation and procedure on land acquisition of property. The State of T.N has made 3 different state laws w.r.t. land acquisition which was struck off by the High Court. Thereafter, state of TN in year 2019 enacted the same law but with president assent under Article 254 to avoid the repugnancy with 2013 act under Article 254. The appeal filed before apex court w.r.t. repugnancy of 2019 state law with 2013 central law & test of validating the struck off law. The Supreme Court observed as: VALIDATING A LAW WITH RETROSPECTIVE EFFECT Case Law Relevant Remarks National  Agricultural  Cooperative  Marketing  Federation  of India Ltd. & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors, (2003) 5 SCC 23 The legislati
Read more