Topic
A Section 11(6) petition is limited to a prima-facie test of the arbitration agreement, with limitation defences outside the court’s jurisdiction. The court also held that non-signatory promoters can be treated as parties to the arbitration. This narrows Section 11 scope and extends arbitral reach to promoters.
MP High Court rules that an exchange of show-cause notice and reply between parties satisfies the 'live dispute' requirement under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, enabling arbitrator appointment. The decision clarifies that formal disputes need not escalate to litigation before arbitration can be invoked, impacting contract enforcement and dispute resolution timelines.
Delhi High Court upholds direct arbitrator appointment by mutual consent, eliminating the need for Section 11 court intervention. The ruling reinforces party autonomy under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, allowing parties to streamline dispute resolution while converting Section 9 interim relief applications into Section 17 arbitral tribunal orders.
Telangana High Court holds that failure to file counter affidavit despite repeated adjournments permits appointment of independent arbitrator under Section 11(5)&(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Supreme Court holds that disputes involving serious allegations of forgery regarding the arbitration agreement itself are non-arbitrable and require judicial determination.