https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278027 Where an arbitration clause required a three-member tribunal and was silent on how to resolve objections to a nominated arbitrator, the Indian Council of Arbitration's procedural rules governed the substitution process. After notice and an opportunity to replace the nominee were given and no substitute was furnished, the Council validly appointed a substitute nominee and constituted the tribunal. A challenge to the tribunal's constitution was treated as a jurisdictional objection falling within Section 16, not a basis for recourse under Section 14. The Section 14 petition was therefore not maintainable, and the arbitral tribunal was held to be validly constituted. en-us Thu, 01 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 05 Jan 2019 06:21:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278027 Where an arbitration clause required a three-member tribunal and was silent on how to resolve objections to a nominated arbitrator, the Indian Council of Arbitration's procedural rules governed the substitution process. After notice and an opportunity to replace the nominee were given and no substitute was furnished, the Council validly appointed a substitute nominee and constituted the tribunal. A challenge to the tribunal's constitution was treated as a jurisdictional objection falling within Section 16, not a basis for recourse under Section 14. The Section 14 petition was therefore not maintainable, and the arbitral tribunal was held to be validly constituted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 01 Mar 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278027