https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310707 Clause 29 of the arbitration agreement created a complete contractual appointment mechanism, requiring the dispute to be referred first to the Chief Engineer and then to MPL Com. before an Arbitration Board could be constituted, and making the contractor's furnishing of a security deposit a condition precedent to maintainability of the reference and to the Corporation's duty to constitute the Board. Because the security deposit had not been furnished, that contractual obligation had not arisen. The High Court therefore could not bypass the agreed procedure and appoint a retired Chief Justice as sole arbitrator under Section 11(6)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. en-us Fri, 13 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 08 Nov 2023 16:47:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310707 Clause 29 of the arbitration agreement created a complete contractual appointment mechanism, requiring the dispute to be referred first to the Chief Engineer and then to MPL Com. before an Arbitration Board could be constituted, and making the contractor's furnishing of a security deposit a condition precedent to maintainability of the reference and to the Corporation's duty to constitute the Board. Because the security deposit had not been furnished, that contractual obligation had not arisen. The High Court therefore could not bypass the agreed procedure and appoint a retired Chief Justice as sole arbitrator under Section 11(6)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 13 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=310707