• About
  • Contcat Us
Monday, January 30, 2023
Justice Bench
No Result
View All Result
  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Online Internship
  • Forums
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Online Internship
  • Forums
No Result
View All Result
justice bench
No Result
View All Result
Home News

The Commercial Courts Act does not diminish the High Court’s authority to appoint an arbitrator held the Bombay High Court

By Justuce Bench by By Justuce Bench
September 10, 2022
in News
Reading Time: 3 mins read
0
0
Bombay high court

Bombay high court

0
SHARES
3
VIEWS

The Commercial Courts Act (CCA) does not interfere with or impair the rights of the High Court or Supreme Court to select arbitrators under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act (Act), according to a recent ruling by the Bombay High Court in the case of Uttam Energy Ltd. v. Shivratna Udyog Ltd.

The Court made its decision in response to an application made by the business Uttam Energy Ltd., which asked for the establishment of an arbitral tribunal to settle a dispute between parties deriving from a contract.

Regarding the agreement’s arbitration provision, the petitioner acknowledged there was no disagreement. Invoking the provision, the petitioner corporation informed Shivratna Udyog, the respondent, that a lone arbitrator would be appointed.

READ ALSO

The Supreme Court Collegium recommends advocate Neela Gokhale as judge of the Bombay High Court

The Supreme Court Collegium recommends the appointment of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts

However, the present petition was eventually filed because there was no response to the original. Given that the parties’ disagreement was believed to be a commercial disagreement, this case was initially submitted on the original side of the High Court as a petition for commercial arbitration.

The case was allowed to be transferred to the appellate side after it was determined that there had been no cause of action to seek such jurisdiction inside Mumbai.

The respondent objected to the petition’s maintainability in order to oppose the application. In it, the following was argued:

that the High Court on the appeal side lacks jurisdiction to name an arbitrator because the current proceedings are in the type of commercial arbitration procedures;

that any applications or appeals arising out of an arbitration under the ACA, if it is not an international commercial arbitration, must be brought before any major civil court of original jurisdiction in the district (and not a High Court) with territorial jurisdiction over the arbitration;

that the selected court in Pune or Solapur, rather than Mumbai, would be the primary civil court with original jurisdiction over the current matter.

The petitioner responded by claiming that only the High Court has the authority to name an arbitral panel in accordance with Section 11 of the ACA.

The High Court determined that Section 10(3)(1) and Section 6 of CCA do not interfere with or divest the High Court’s authority and jurisdiction under Section 11 of ACA after hearing arguments from both sides.

To take within the of Section 10(3)(1) of CCA the jurisdiction and power in relation to the appointment of an arbitral tribunal, to be exercised by the Commercial Court exercising territorial jurisdiction over such arbitration, when the exclusive jurisdiction to make appointment of an arbitral tribunal within the meaning of section 11 of the ACA is conferred on the High Court or the Supreme Court as the case may be under section 11 of ACA, it would amount to a complete misreading of Section 10(3)(1) of CCA and in fact would lead to an absurdity,”

The Court Held

After resolving this matter, the Court also stated that an arbitration agreement existed, which was necessary for exercising jurisdiction under Section 11(6) read with sub-section (6-A) of the ACA, and since the agreement existed, an arbitrator could be chosen.

The petitioner was represented by attorneys Aman Kacheria, Rahul Agarwal, and Jasmin Puranik. The respondent was represented by advocates Milind Prabhune and Abhijit Kulkarni.

[Read Order]

Uttam Energy Ltd. v. Shivratna Udyog Ltd..pdf
Tags: Arbitration and Conciliation ActBombay high courtCommercial Courts Act
ShareTweetSendShare

Related Posts

Bombay high court
News

The Supreme Court Collegium recommends advocate Neela Gokhale as judge of the Bombay High Court

January 11, 2023
The Supreme Court Collegium recommends the appointment of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts
News

The Supreme Court Collegium recommends the appointment of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts

January 11, 2023
Supreme Court Collegium reiterates Nagendra Ramachandra Naik’s appointment as a Karnataka High Court judge for the third time.
News

Supreme Court Collegium reiterates Nagendra Ramachandra Naik’s appointment as a Karnataka High Court judge for the third time.

January 11, 2023
judges appointment to Andhra Pradesh and Karanataka High court
News

Collegium proposes the appointment of two judicial officers as judges of the high courts of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka.

January 11, 2023
The Uttarakhand High Court's order to the CBI to investigate former CM Trivendra Rawat was quashed by the Supreme Court.
News

The Uttarakhand High Court’s order to the CBI to investigate former CM Trivendra Rawat was quashed by the Supreme Court.

January 5, 2023
Madras-HC-uapa
News

Can the blind guide the blind? The Madras High Court orders the TN Judicial Academy to provide judges with UAPA and remand training.

December 30, 2022
google news
google news

POPULAR NEWS

Justices DY Chandrachud, AS Bopanna, and Bela M. Trivedi,

Execution of Document not to be considered based on Admission of Sign on Document Rules Supreme Court

May 12, 2022
DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ADVOCATE AND LAWYER

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ADVOCATE AND A LAWYER?

June 4, 2022
La Milano Pizzeria restrained  from representing previous association with La Pino'z - know more

La Milano Pizzeria restrained  from representing previous association with La Pino’z – know more

May 20, 2022
Why does Sequoia Capital terminate connections with Sandeep Kapoors Algo Legal? threats of ED searches, arm-twisting, and more

Why does Sequoia Capital terminate connections with Sandeep Kapoors Algo Legal? threats of ED searches, arm-twisting, and more

June 6, 2022
jug jugg jeeyo

Copyright infringement | Jugjugg Jeeyo movie stay refused by Ranchi court

June 25, 2022

Tags

advocate Algo Legal Allahabad HC Allahabad High Court Anil Deshmukh anticipatory bail Appointment of Judges bail Bombay high court calcutta high court central government cji Collegium Collegium Recommendations defamation delhi high court divorce Enforcement Directorate Gujarat High court Gyanvapi Mosque high court judges IPR Judicial Appointments justice bench karnataka high court kerala high court latest judgements legal news madras high court murder Nawab Malik patna high court pil pocso act public interest litigation Rouse Avenue Court Sequoia Capital study material supreme court Supreme Court Collegium supreme court of india UAPA Union Law Ministry Uttar Pradesh varanasi court

The Supreme Court Collegium recommends advocate Neela Gokhale as judge of the Bombay High Court

by By Justuce Bench
January 11, 2023
0
Bombay high court
News

Advocate Neela Gokhale was today recommended for promotion as judge of the Bombay High Court by the Supreme Court Collegium.

Read more

The Supreme Court Collegium recommends the appointment of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts

by By Justuce Bench
January 11, 2023
0
The Supreme Court Collegium recommends the appointment of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts
News

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court Collegium proposed the nomination of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts.

Read more

Supreme Court Collegium reiterates Nagendra Ramachandra Naik’s appointment as a Karnataka High Court judge for the third time.

by By Justuce Bench
January 11, 2023
0
Supreme Court Collegium reiterates Nagendra Ramachandra Naik’s appointment as a Karnataka High Court judge for the third time.
News

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court Collegium decided to confirm the appointment of attorney Nagendra Ramachandra Naik as a Karnataka High...

Read more

Collegium proposes the appointment of two judicial officers as judges of the high courts of Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka.

by By Justuce Bench
January 11, 2023
0
judges appointment to Andhra Pradesh and Karanataka High court
News

Tuesday, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended that two judicial officers be appointed as judges of the Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka...

Read more

About

Justice Bench is one of the fastest growing news legal portal in India, for latest Latest Legal News india, Supreme Court judgement updates, High Courts Judgments updates,Law Firms News in india, Law School News, Latest Legal News india visit us.

Follow us

google news
google news

Recent Posts

  • The Supreme Court Collegium recommends advocate Neela Gokhale as judge of the Bombay High Court

Popular News

  • DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ADVOCATE AND LAWYER

    WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ADVOCATE AND A LAWYER?

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • The Supreme Court Collegium recommends the appointment of judges to the Gauhati and Manipur High Courts

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0
  • La Milano Pizzeria restrained  from representing previous association with La Pino’z – know more

    0 shares
    Share 0 Tweet 0

© 2022 JusticeBench  |  Privacy Policy  | Terms of Use

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Articles
  • Online Internship
  • Forums

© 2022 JusticeBench  |  Privacy Policy  | Terms of Use

Welcome Back!

Sign In with Google
OR

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password? Sign Up

Create New Account!

Sign Up with Google
OR

Fill the forms below to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In