Sale Deeds Must Be Interpreted Literally When the Language is Clear and Unambiguous: Supreme Court    |     Non-Signatory Can Be Bound by Arbitration Clause Based on Conduct and Involvement: Supreme Court    |     Right to Passport is a Fundamental Right, Denial Without Justification Violates Article 21: Allahabad High Court    |     Insurance Company's Liability Remains Despite Policy Cancellation Due to Dishonored Cheque: Calcutta High Court    |     Deductions Under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act Are Independent and Cannot Be Curtailed: Bombay High Court    |     Diary Entries Cannot Alone Implicate the Accused Without Corroborative Evidence: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Corruption Case    |     MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     If Two Reasonable Conclusions Are Possible, Acquittal Should Not Be Disturbed: Supreme Court    |     Kalelkar Award Explicitly Provides Holiday Benefits for Temporary Employees, Not Subject to Government Circulars: Supreme Court Upholds Holiday and Overtime Pay    |     NDPS | Homogeneous Mixing of Bulk Drugs Essential for Valid Sampling Under NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     POCSO | Scholar Register Is Sufficient to Determine Victim’s Age in POCSO Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court    |     Abuse of Official Position in Appointments: Prima Facie Case for Criminal Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing of Charges Against Swati Maliwal in DCW Corruption Case    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |    

In the Absence of Formal Notice, Arbitration Cannot be Invoked: Andhra Pradesh High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling on the procedural requisites for initiating arbitration, the High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissed an arbitration application due to non-compliance with the formal notice requirements stipulated under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Legal Point: The court’s decision centered on the application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing the necessity of fulfilling contractual obligations for notice before arbitration can be rightfully invoked.

Facts and Issues: M/s Shree Swaminarayan Travels sought to resolve disputes arising from a transportation services contract with Oil Natural Gas Corporation Limited (ONGC), claiming dues amounting to over 65 lakh rupees. The applicant argued that despite reaching out for dispute resolution through an Outside Expert Committee, no formal arbitration notice was issued as per the contractual agreement following the 60-day dispute notice period, leading to their application for appointing an independent arbitrator.

Contractual Compliance: Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur emphasized the contractual requirement that an arbitration clause can only be invoked after issuing a formal notice upon the expiry of the 60-day dispute period as per the agreement. “The conditions of the agreement clearly necessitated a formal notice for invoking arbitration which was unfortunately overlooked,” observed the Chief Justice.

Procedural Integrity: The court highlighted that adherence to the agreed dispute resolution mechanism is paramount. “Parties are bound by the terms they have agreed upon, and courts expect strict compliance before judicial intervention is considered,” Justice Thakur added.

Legal Precedents: Referencing the case of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd v. M/S Nortel Networks India Pvt. Ltd., the court reiterated that the application under Section 11 can only proceed once it is established that the arbitration notice has been properly served and there was a failure in appointment as per the arbitration clause.

Decision: The High Court dismissed the application for the appointment of an arbitrator, citing the absence of a formal notice as fatal to the applicant’s plea. The applicant was granted liberty to re-apply following the correct procedural format as outlined in their contract.

Date of Decision: May 10, 2024

M/s Shree Swaminarayan Travels vs. M/s Oil Natural Gas Corporation Limited

Similar News