Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

september 2014

Supreme Court of India · 2014-09-22

M/S Ashoka Tubewell & Engg Corp.Etc Etc vs Union Of India Etc Etc

Court
Supreme Court of India
Petitioner
M/S Ashoka Tubewell & Engg Corp.Etc Etc
Respondent
Union Of India Etc Etc
Author
Anil R. Dave
Bench
Uday Umesh Lalit, Anil R. Dave

Judgment text excerpt

The Supreme Court addressed the validity of an Arbitrator's appointment under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, in light of a specific arbitration clause requiring a Gazetted Railway Officer as the sole arbitrator. The Court held that the appointment of Justice Kalyanmoy Ganguly, a retired High Court Judge, was valid due to the mutual consent of both parties, despite the clause's stipulation. The Court overturned the Calcutta High Court's decision that had set aside the Award on the grounds of invalid appointment, thereby reinstating the Award.

M/S Ashoka Tubewell & Engg Corp.Etc Etc vs Union Of India Etc Etc · Niyam