TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015, including the restricted scope of Section 11(6A), applies to a Section 11 application where the request invoking arbitration was issued before the amendment came into force but the Section 11 petition was filed thereafter.
Analysis: The relevant framework comprised Sections 21 and 26 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the amending provision inserted by the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015. The governing distinction was between the commencement of arbitral proceedings under Section 21 and court proceedings in relation to such arbitration. The prior notice invoking arbitration, issued before the amendment date, marked the commencement of arbitral proceedings. The later filing of the Section 11 petition did not alter that position. The Court held that the amendment was prospective for such arbitral proceedings and that the unamended law continued to govern the request for appointment of an arbitrator in the facts of the case.
Conclusion: The amended regime, including Section 11(6A), did not apply to the Section 11 proceedings in question, and the High Court was right in deciding the matter under the pre-amendment law.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
