https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422862 Under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the HC held that appointment of an arbitrator cannot be refused unless non-arbitrability is ex facie clear. Where the objection depends on contested questions, such as whether claims were extinguished by an approved resolution plan or survived insolvency proceedings, the issue requires merits adjudication and is not fit for summary determination at the referral stage. Applying the principle that doubts should be resolved in favour of arbitration, the Court rejected the threshold objection and allowed the petition, directing constitution of the arbitral tribunal subject to statutory disclosure and eligibility requirements. en-us Fri, 11 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 May 2022 11:16:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422862 Under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the HC held that appointment of an arbitrator cannot be refused unless non-arbitrability is ex facie clear. Where the objection depends on contested questions, such as whether claims were extinguished by an approved resolution plan or survived insolvency proceedings, the issue requires merits adjudication and is not fit for summary determination at the referral stage. Applying the principle that doubts should be resolved in favour of arbitration, the Court rejected the threshold objection and allowed the petition, directing constitution of the arbitral tribunal subject to statutory disclosure and eligibility requirements. Case-Laws Insolvency and Bankruptcy Fri, 11 Feb 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=422862