Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether an order passed by the Chief Justice or his nominee under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 on preliminary issues is administrative or judicial in nature and whether the question required reconsideration in the light of competing authorities on the scope of court intervention at the stage of appointment of arbitrators.
Analysis: The order recorded substantial submissions that, although an arbitrator may decide issues of jurisdiction under section 16(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, a court approached under section 8 or section 11 may itself decide threshold questions such as the existence of an arbitration agreement, the existence of a dispute, excepted matters, and limitation for invoking the clause. It also noted the practical consequences of treating such an order as administrative, including multiplicity of proceedings and delay, and observed that the issue arose frequently and had a substantial bearing on arbitration practice.
Outcome: The papers were directed to be placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders, and the question was left for reconsideration.