TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 836
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e 3rd respondent. The petitioner issued Annexure 3 notice through his lawyer requesting the 2nd respondent to appoint an arbitrator for resolution of disputes between him and the 3rd respondent. According to the petitioner, the request was made in view of Section 42(3) of the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 ('SEZ Act' for short). There is no response from the 2nd respondent yet. 2. This arbitration request has been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a suitable person as arbitrator to settle the dispute between the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. 3. When the learned counsel for the petitioner was called upon to explain how this application can be maintained under Section 11 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate, designate one or more courts (a) to try all suits of a civil nature arising in the Special Economic Zone; and (b) to try notified offences committed in the Special Economic Zone. (2). No court, other than the court designated under subsection (1), shall try any suit or conduct the trial of any notified offence referred to in that sub-section: Provided that the courts, in which any suit of a civil nature in a Special Economic Zone had been filed before the commencement of this Act, shall continue to try such suit after such commencement: Provided further that the courts, in which any trial of any notified offence is being conducted before the commencement of this Act, shall continue to conduc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tration and Conciliation Act, 1996 shall apply to all arbitration under this Act as if the proceedings for arbitration were referred in settlement or decision under provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996." 6. According to the petitioner, the State Government has not designated any Court under Section 23 of the SEZ Act. Therefore, the petitioner submits that the dispute arisen between him and the 3rd respondent is liable to be referred to arbitration. It is also submitted that the arbitrator needs to be appointed by the Central Government as provided under Section 42(2) of the SEZ Act. Further the petitioner contends that the 2nd respondent, despite the notice issued, has failed to appoint an arbitrator. Petitioner maint....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 3rd respondent for appointment of an arbitrator. 9. The actual grievance of the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent has not appointed an arbitrator under Section 42(2) of the SEZ Act in spite of the request made by the petitioner. Arbitration as provided under Section 42 of the SEZ Act is a remedy provided in the absence of Courts designated under Section 23 of the SEZ Act. It is a special remedy. The said remedy shall therefore be invoked only as provided under the SEZ Act. Power to appoint an arbitrator under Section 42 of the SEZ Act is vested with the Central Government as precisely provided under Section 42(2) of the Act. Even if the said power is not exercised by the Central Government despite being requested to do so, the same ....