https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287954 The Court appointed Mr. Arif Doctor as the sole Arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from an Agreement dated 20th February, 2014, despite the Agreement specifying arbitration by three arbitrators. The parties mutually agreed to opt for a sole Arbitrator instead, deviating from the Agreement's Clause (IX) mandating three arbitrators in Mumbai. The venue of arbitration was confirmed in Mumbai, and the Court issued directions for the arbitration proceedings, emphasizing limited adjournments and equal sharing of initial arbitration costs. The Arbitration Application was disposed of based on the appointment of the sole Arbitrator and procedural aspects outlined. en-us Thu, 26 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 12 May 2020 08:51:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287954 The Court appointed Mr. Arif Doctor as the sole Arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from an Agreement dated 20th February, 2014, despite the Agreement specifying arbitration by three arbitrators. The parties mutually agreed to opt for a sole Arbitrator instead, deviating from the Agreement's Clause (IX) mandating three arbitrators in Mumbai. The venue of arbitration was confirmed in Mumbai, and the Court issued directions for the arbitration proceedings, emphasizing limited adjournments and equal sharing of initial arbitration costs. The Arbitration Application was disposed of based on the appointment of the sole Arbitrator and procedural aspects outlined. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Thu, 26 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287954