• About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Contact Us
Thursday, February 25, 2021
Law Trend
  • google-play
  • apple-store
  • Login
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Judgements
  • Law Trend - हिन्दी
  • Bare Acts and Rules
    • Central
    • State
  • Webinar
  • Columns
  • Online Internship
  • More
    • Humour
    • Submit Judgment/Order/Posts
    • Quotes
    • Legal Dictionary
    • Courts Weblink
No Result
View All Result
Law Trend
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Judgements
  • Law Trend - हिन्दी
  • Bare Acts and Rules
    • Central
    • State
  • Webinar
  • Columns
  • Online Internship
  • More
    • Humour
    • Submit Judgment/Order/Posts
    • Quotes
    • Legal Dictionary
    • Courts Weblink
No Result
View All Result
Law Trend
No Result
View All Result

Whether a Condition of Pre-Deposit for Invoking Arbitration is Valid?

by Law Trend
November 19, 2020
in Judgements, Trending Stories
4 min read
Arbitration
530
SHARES
1.5k
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare via WhatsappShare via EmailPinterest

Recently, the Kerala High Court clarified the scope of power to be exercised by the Courts u/s 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 and also, the effect of pre-condition imposed against invoking of an Arbitration Agreement.

Background of the Case:-

The petitioner in the case was a company incorporated under Companies Act,1956 with its office in Delhi and the respondent was Airport Authority of India a statutory body responsible for creating, maintaining, managing and upgrading civil aviation infrastructure of India.

Respondents had floated a request for proposal(RFP) and a request for Qualification(RFQ) for concession to develop, setup, market, maintain, operate and manage Food and Beverage outlets at Calicut Airport and had invited bids for the same.

The petitioners submitted financial and technical bids, and the petitioner was awarded the concession.

The parties executed the Concession Agreement and Letter of Intent to Award.

It was alleged that the respondents raised wrong invoices by the petitioner paid them anyhow.

Due to losses sustained, the petitioner issued a termination notice and vacated the premises.

Respondent invoked a bank guarantee that was furnished by the petitioner as security and also blacklisted the petitioner for three years.

The Principal District Judge injuncted the invocation of Bank Guarantee.

Consequently, the petitioner invoked the arbitration agreement vide notice dated 23.09.2019 and nominated its Arbitrator as the Sole Arbitrator.

The respondent refutes the recourse of Arbitration. Aggrieved, the petitioner moved the Supreme Court with an Arbitration Request.

Contentions raised before the Court:-

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that making the petitioner choose an arbitrator from a panel suggested by the respondent has been declared bad in law by the Apex Court in Perkin Eastman vs HSCC Ltd.

It was argued that the condition of the respondent to make a pre-deposit to invoke Arbitration could not be seen as valid in light of the Supreme Court’s judgement in ICOMM Tele vs Punjab Water Supply Board.

The Counsel also submitted that after the amendment of 2015, in proceedings u/s 11 of the Arbitration Act, the Court can only examine the existence of the Arbitration agreement and nothing more.

Counsel for the respondent argued that the Arbitration request was not maintainable for it being a premature step. He also referred to clause 5.15(i) and (ii) of the RFP where it was stated that to invoke Arbitration, the petitioner will have to pre-deposit the disputed amount.

Reasoning of the Court:

The Court observed that post the amendment of 2015, the role of the Court while entertaining a petition u/s 11 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act has become limited to one aspect, i.e. the existence of arbitration agreement between the parties.

It was further observed that there was no dispute between the parties regarding the existence of the arbitration agreement, but the issue was whether the petitioner was required to fulfil any pre-conditions before invoking Arbitration.

A reference was made to Perkins Eastman vs HSCC and ICOMM Tele Ltd vs Punjab Water Supply Board where it was held that pre-deposit of an amount as a condition for invoking Arbitration was bad in law.

Decision of the Court:-

The instant petition was allowed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and an Arbitrator was appointed by the Court to conduct the arbitration proceedings.

Case Details:

Title: Lite Bite Foods Pvt. Ltd Vs Airports Authority Of India

Case No.: A.R. No. 103 of 2019

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar

Date of Judgment: 28.10.2020

Read Judgment
Tags: arbitrationhigh court judgementkerala high court

Related Posts

netaji shubhas chandra bose
Court Updates

High Court Directs Central Government to Consider Request For Printing Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose Photo on Currency Notes

February 24, 2021
Supreme Court New 1
Court Updates

SC pulls up a petitioner in person who addressed the Court as “Your Honour”

February 24, 2021
gavel 2
Court Updates

Fine Of Rs 50000 Imposed For Lodging False FIR of Rape Against Neighbour

February 24, 2021

Advertisement

POPULAR NEWS

  • Justice Pushpa V Ganediwala lawtrend

    Bombay HC Judge who gave “Skin to Skin” POCSO Verdict loses Judgeship Confirmation

    5716 shares
    Share 2286 Tweet 1429
  • Where is the Provision of Using Advocate Sticker on Vehicle?

    5107 shares
    Share 2043 Tweet 1277
  • What is the tenure of protection granted under Anticipatory Bail? :SC 5 Judges

    4825 shares
    Share 1929 Tweet 1206
  • Air Asia Crashes Against Gaurav Taneja; Court Says Airline Suppressed Facts

    4688 shares
    Share 1875 Tweet 1172
  • Husband-Wife Take Oath as High Court Judge

    3269 shares
    Share 1308 Tweet 817
Law Trend

Rabhyaa Foundation has started this platform on values enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of India. The object of this platform is to create informed citizens with recent legal updates, Judgments, Legislations of Parliament and State Legislatures, and views of experts in the field of law, in plain and pointed language, for the intellectual development of citizens.
Our tag line “The Line of Law” guides that this......
Read More

Follow Us On Social Media

Subscribe to our News Letter

Sign Up for weekly newsletter to get the latest news, Updates and amazing offers delivered directly in to your inbox.

Categories

  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Columns
  • Bare Acts and Rules
  • Online Internship
  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Contact Us

© 2020 Law Trends| All Right Reserved | Designed ByAaratechnologies Pvt Ltd

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Judgements
  • Law Trend – हिन्दी
  • Bare Acts and Rules
    • Central
    • State
      • Uttar Pradesh Acts
      • Uttar Pradesh Rules
      • Uttrakhand
      • DELHI
  • Webinar/Videos
  • Columns
  • Online Internship
  • More
    • Humour
    • Submit Judgment/Order/Posts
    • Quotes
    • Legal Dictionary
    • Courts Weblink
  • Android App
  • IOS APP

© 2020 Law Trends| All Right Reserved | Designed ByAaratechnologies Pvt Ltd

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Create New Account!

Fill the forms bellow to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

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

Log In