https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422046 A controversy that a sole arbitrator's mandate had terminated for failure to act without undue delay falls within section 14(1)(a) read with section 14(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and must be decided by the court under that provision. Where the arbitrator was appointed by mutual consent, section 11(6) cannot be invoked again to secure replacement on the basis of alleged delay, so the fresh appointment order was set aside. At the threshold, an Order VII Rule 11 challenge could not succeed because the pleaded case under section 14 had to be examined on its merits; the refusal to reject those proceedings was therefore upheld. en-us Thu, 05 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 May 2022 06:36:05 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422046 A controversy that a sole arbitrator's mandate had terminated for failure to act without undue delay falls within section 14(1)(a) read with section 14(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and must be decided by the court under that provision. Where the arbitrator was appointed by mutual consent, section 11(6) cannot be invoked again to secure replacement on the basis of alleged delay, so the fresh appointment order was set aside. At the threshold, an Order VII Rule 11 challenge could not succeed because the pleaded case under section 14 had to be examined on its merits; the refusal to reject those proceedings was therefore upheld. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 05 May 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422046