https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233796 In proceedings for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the court's role is confined to preliminary questions such as jurisdiction, existence of an arbitration agreement, party status, and whether a live claim exists; it cannot conduct a detailed merits enquiry or decide disputed facts as if trying the suit. The decision also confirms that an arbitration clause is separable from the main contract and survives even where the underlying agreement is alleged to be void. The matter was therefore required to be reconsidered within the limited referral jurisdiction, with the arbitration agreement treated as independently enforceable. en-us Fri, 10 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Aug 2016 12:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233796 In proceedings for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the court's role is confined to preliminary questions such as jurisdiction, existence of an arbitration agreement, party status, and whether a live claim exists; it cannot conduct a detailed merits enquiry or decide disputed facts as if trying the suit. The decision also confirms that an arbitration clause is separable from the main contract and survives even where the underlying agreement is alleged to be void. The matter was therefore required to be reconsidered within the limited referral jurisdiction, with the arbitration agreement treated as independently enforceable. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 10 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=233796