https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417883 At the Section 11 stage under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, valid service through advocate's notice on the Bombay High Court Original Side was accepted, and the appellant's later non-appearance did not invalidate that service. Objections that there was no arbitration agreement or that the claims were time-barred were not finally decided in the appointment proceedings; they had already been raised before the arbitral tribunal and in pending Section 34 proceedings. Applying the limited scope of scrutiny at Section 11, the SC held that plainly arguable issues of non-arbitrability and limitation should ordinarily be left to the tribunal or post-award review, so no interference with the sole arbitrator's appointment was warranted. en-us Wed, 02 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Feb 2022 06:59:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417883 At the Section 11 stage under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, valid service through advocate's notice on the Bombay High Court Original Side was accepted, and the appellant's later non-appearance did not invalidate that service. Objections that there was no arbitration agreement or that the claims were time-barred were not finally decided in the appointment proceedings; they had already been raised before the arbitral tribunal and in pending Section 34 proceedings. Applying the limited scope of scrutiny at Section 11, the SC held that plainly arguable issues of non-arbitrability and limitation should ordinarily be left to the tribunal or post-award review, so no interference with the sole arbitrator's appointment was warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 02 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=417883