https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108831 Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was unavailable where an arbitrator was already in office and the arbitration clause had been acted upon. In that situation, the proper remedy for alleged failure by the existing arbitrator to act without undue delay was removal under section 14(1)(a), not a fresh appointment petition. Any challenge to a subsequent appointment on grounds of independence or impartiality had to be pursued through the challenge procedure under section 13. On those facts, the petition for appointment of an independent arbitrator was held not maintainable and was dismissed. en-us Tue, 17 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Apr 2012 11:32:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108831 Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was unavailable where an arbitrator was already in office and the arbitration clause had been acted upon. In that situation, the proper remedy for alleged failure by the existing arbitrator to act without undue delay was removal under section 14(1)(a), not a fresh appointment petition. Any challenge to a subsequent appointment on grounds of independence or impartiality had to be pursued through the challenge procedure under section 13. On those facts, the petition for appointment of an independent arbitrator was held not maintainable and was dismissed. Case-Laws Companies Law Tue, 17 Sep 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108831