https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108944 A writ petition challenging an order appointing arbitrators under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was treated as not maintainable where an arbitration agreement admittedly existed. The Court applied the principle that the appointing authority under Section 11 performs a limited role to constitute the tribunal and does not decide the merits of the dispute. It further noted that objections to the existence, validity, or constitution of the arbitral tribunal can be raised before the tribunal itself under Section 16. A writ challenge cannot ordinarily be used merely to contest the appointment procedure or the alleged vagueness of the arbitration clause. en-us Fri, 22 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 05 Apr 2012 10:31:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108944 A writ petition challenging an order appointing arbitrators under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was treated as not maintainable where an arbitration agreement admittedly existed. The Court applied the principle that the appointing authority under Section 11 performs a limited role to constitute the tribunal and does not decide the merits of the dispute. It further noted that objections to the existence, validity, or constitution of the arbitral tribunal can be raised before the tribunal itself under Section 16. A writ challenge cannot ordinarily be used merely to contest the appointment procedure or the alleged vagueness of the arbitration clause. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 22 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108944