TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Premature arbitration request dismissed for failure to follow contract terms; adherence to dispute resolution process required.</h1> <h3>Nirman Sindia Versus Indal Electromelts Ltd., Coimbatore and Ors.</h3> Nirman Sindia Versus Indal Electromelts Ltd., Coimbatore and Ors. - TMI Issues:1. Premature arbitration request filed without complying with the procedure laid down in the agreement.Analysis:1. The arbitration request was filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act to appoint an arbitrator to resolve disputes between the applicant and the 1st respondent as per the agreement. The applicant claimed that the 1st respondent unilaterally terminated the agreement without following the specified procedures for dispute resolution.2. The main objection raised by the 1st respondent was that the arbitration request was premature as the applicant did not comply with the procedure outlined in Clauses 24 and 25 of the agreement. Clause 24 allowed the contractor to refer decisions by the Engineer to the Adjudicator, while Clause 25 specified the procedure for disputes and arbitration.3. The applicant argued that since the Arbitration and Conciliation Act provisions were specifically made applicable in the agreement, they were entitled to file the arbitration request without following the steps involving the Engineer and Adjudicator. However, the court found that parties must adhere to the agreed-upon dispute resolution process in the contract.4. The court emphasized that parties must follow the prescribed steps in the agreement before resorting to arbitration. By not referring disputes to the Engineer and preventing the Adjudicator from adjudicating, the applicant failed to comply with the contractual requirements for arbitration.5. Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the court reiterated that parties cannot enforce arbitration clauses without complying with preceding steps outlined in the agreement. The applicant's failure to follow the prescribed procedure rendered the arbitration request premature and not maintainable.6. The court dismissed the arbitration request but allowed the applicant to enforce the arbitration clause after fulfilling the prerequisites specified in the agreement. Compliance with the contractual dispute resolution process was deemed essential before seeking arbitration.In conclusion, the court ruled that the premature arbitration request, filed without following the contractual procedure, was not maintainable. The judgment highlighted the importance of adhering to the agreed-upon steps for dispute resolution before resorting to arbitration, as outlined in the contract.
TaxTMI 