Arbitration notice objections waived when arbitrator was appointed by consent; writ jurisdiction does not lie against the tribunal's notice.

A writ petition was held not maintainable against a notice issued by an arbitrator appointed under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, where the appointment had been made with the petitioner's consent and was not challenged. The Court held that the petitioner was estopped from objecting to the commencement of arbitration on the ground of non-service of notice under section 21. In view of section 16, objections to jurisdiction and arbitral proceedings had to be raised before the arbitral tribunal. The Court also held that it could not reopen the appointment process or require the parties to restart proceedings under section 21, and that reliance on an earlier decision under the 1940 Act was inapplicable.

---

---

Issues: Whether a writ petition was maintainable against a notice issued by an arbitrator appointed under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and whether the petitioner could still insist on service of notice under section 21 despite having sought and obtained appointment of an independent arbitrator.

Analysis: The arbitrator had been appointed by the Court with the petitioner's consent, and the petitioner had not challenged that appointment order. In that situation, the Court held that the petitioner was estopped from re-agitating objections to the commencement of arbitration on the basis of non-service of notice under section 21. The Court further held that, in view of section 16, objections relating to jurisdiction and the arbitral proceedings had to be raised before the arbitrator. A notice issued by the arbitrator was not itself a proper subject of writ jurisdiction, and the Court could not reopen the appointment process or require the parties to restart the procedure under section 21. The reliance placed on an earlier decision under the 1940 Act was held inapplicable.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable, and the objections based on section 21 were waived and had to be pursued before the arbitral tribunal.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an arbitrator has been appointed with the party's consent, objections to the arbitral process, including non-service of notice under section 21, are waived or are to be raised before the arbitral tribunal under section 16, and a writ petition does not lie merely against the arbitrator's notice.

---