https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281412 An arbitration clause that left the appointing authority blank was held vague and uncertain, so it could not be enforced under the statutory scheme for appointment of arbitrators. Reading the clause with Sections 10 and 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and Section 29 of the Contract Act, the Court found that the omission made the agreement incapable of certain application, and the default appointment mechanism did not cure the defect because it applies only where no appointment procedure has been agreed. The Court also held that a non-signatory party was a necessary and proper party to the suit, so the claim could not be referred to arbitration in its absence. The Section 8 application was rejected. en-us Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Apr 2023 13:09:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281412 An arbitration clause that left the appointing authority blank was held vague and uncertain, so it could not be enforced under the statutory scheme for appointment of arbitrators. Reading the clause with Sections 10 and 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and Section 29 of the Contract Act, the Court found that the omission made the agreement incapable of certain application, and the default appointment mechanism did not cure the defect because it applies only where no appointment procedure has been agreed. The Court also held that a non-signatory party was a necessary and proper party to the suit, so the claim could not be referred to arbitration in its absence. The Section 8 application was rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 01 Apr 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281412