38.6c New Delhi, India, Friday, April 12, 2024
Judiciary

Person Interested In the Outcome Of Dispute Does Not Have Power To Appoint Sole Arbitrator: SC [Read Judgment]

By LawStreet News Network      27 November, 2019 02:11 PM      0 Comments
Person Interested In the Outcome Of Dispute Does Not Have Power To Appoint Sole Arbitrator: SC [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court on November 26, 2019, in the case of Perkins Eastman Architects DPC v. HSCC (India) Ltd., has held that a person who has an interest in the outcome or decision of the dispute must not have the power to appoint a sole arbitrator.

A Division Bench comprising of Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice Indu Malhotra was hearing an application filed to seek appointment of a sole Arbitrator in accordance with clause 24 of the Contract executed between the parties.

Clause 24 of the Contract empowered the Chairman and Managing Director of the company to make the appointment of a sole arbitrator and said Clause also stipulates that no person other than a person appointed by such Chairman and Managing Director of the respondent would act as an arbitrator.

The court placed reliance on a judgment in TRF Limited v. Energo Engineering Projects Limited, wherein the court had held that the Managing Director became ineligible by operation of law to act as an arbitrator, he could not nominate another person to act as an arbitrator and that once the identity of the Managing Director as the sole arbitrator was lost, the power to nominate someone else as an arbitrator was also obliterated.

Applying the similar invalidity in the present case, the court observed: “the Managing Director was found incompetent, it was because of the interest that he would be said to be having in the outcome or result of the dispute. The element of invalidity would thus be directly relatable to and arise from the interest that he would be having in such outcome or decision. If that be the test, similar invalidity would always arise and spring even in the second category of cases. If the interest that he has in the outcome of the dispute, is taken to be the basis for the possibility of bias, it will always be present irrespective of whether the matter stands under the first or second category of cases. We are conscious that if such deduction is drawn from the decision of this Court in TRF Limited, all cases having clauses similar to that with which we are presently concerned, a party to the agreement would be disentitled to make any appointment of an Arbitrator on its own and it would always be available to argue that a party or an official or an authority having interest in the dispute would be disentitled to make appointment of an Arbitrator.”

The court further added: “But, in our view that has to be the logical deduction from TRF Limited. Paragraph 50 of the decision shows that this Court was concerned with the issue, "whether the Managing Director, after becoming ineligible by operation of law, is he still eligible to nominate an Arbitrator" The ineligibility referred to therein, was as a result of operation of law, in that a person having an interest in the dispute or in the outcome or decision thereof, must not only be ineligible to act as an arbitrator but must also not be eligible to appoint anyone else as an arbitrator and that such person cannot and should not have any role in charting out any course to the dispute resolution by having the power to appoint an arbitrator. The next sentences in the paragraph, further show that cases where both the parties could nominate respective arbitrators of their choice were found to be completely a different situation. The reason is clear that whatever advantage a party may derive by nominating an arbitrator of its choice would get counter balanced by equal power with the other party. But, in a case where only one party has a right to appoint a sole arbitrator, its choice will always have an element of exclusivity in determining or charting the course for dispute resolution. Naturally, the person who has an interest in the outcome or decision of the dispute must not have the power to appoint a sole arbitrator. That has to be taken as the essence of the amendments brought in by the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 (Act 3 of 2016) and recognised by the decision of this Court in TRF Limited.”

 [Read Judgment]



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS

sc-sets-aside-judgment-upholding-arbitral-award-against-dmrc
Trending Business
SC sets aside judgment upholding arbitral award against DMRC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court overturns arbitral award favoring Reliance Infrastructure subsidiary against DMRC, citing grave miscarriage of justice.

11 April, 2024 11:43 AM
delhi-hc-rejects-third-plea-for-arvind-kejriwals-removal-as-delhi-cm-blasts-petitioner-for-abuse-of-judicial-process
Trending Political NEWS
Delhi HC rejects third plea for Arvind Kejriwal's removal as Delhi CM, blasts petitioner for abuse of judicial process [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court dismisses the third PIL plea before it seeking Aam Aadmi Party leader Arvind Kejriwal’s removal as Chief Minister of Delhi, imposes Rs. 50,000 cost on petitioner.

11 April, 2024 03:29 PM

TOP STORIES

supreme-court-rejects-plea-to-repatriate-mortal-remains-of-sufi-saint-from-dhaka
Trending Judiciary
Supreme Court Rejects Plea to Repatriate Mortal Remains of Sufi Saint from Dhaka

Supreme Court declines plea to repatriate mortal remains of Sufi Saint, an Indian-born Pakistani national who died in Dhaka.

06 April, 2024 01:40 PM
gst-on-online-gaming-companies-sc-transfers-to-itself-all-pleas-pending-in-hcs
Trending Judiciary
'28 % GST on online gaming companies,' SC transfers to itself all pleas pending in 9 HCs

Supreme Court consolidates 27 petitions challenging the 28% GST on online gaming companies from 9 High Courts, amid legal disputes over tax rates.

06 April, 2024 01:45 PM
sc-grants-bail-to-prof-shoma-sen-in-bhima-koregaon-case-read-judgment
Trending Judiciary
SC grants bail to Prof Shoma Sen in Bhima Koregaon case [Read Judgment]

SC grants bail to Prof Shoma Sen in Bhima Koregaon case, citing lack of evidence linking her to banned terrorist group CPI (Maoist). Details inside.

06 April, 2024 01:58 PM
sc-directs-tn-dgp-to-hold-inquiry-for-blatant-shocking-acts-by-police-in-tutoring-witnesses
Trending Judiciary
SC directs TN DGP to hold inquiry for blatant, shocking acts by police in tutoring witnesses [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court directs Tamil Nadu DGP to investigate police misconduct in witness tampering, leading to acquittal in murder case.

06 April, 2024 05:31 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email