Vipul Patil Sole Proprietor of Sharmila Enterprises v. Chintamani Construction Company
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 11 application for appointment of arbitrator
Case brief
What is this about?
Section 11 appointment of sole arbitrator; Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 Sections 11, 11(6A), 16, 17; Section 9 Petition converted to Section 17; Presolv360 ODR online arbitration; Salvage Agreement dated June 29, 2010; Clause 9 arbitration agreement; seat Mumbai; In Re Interplay seven-judge bench; SBI General v. Krish Spinning; Ajay Madhusudan Patel v. Jyotrindra Patel; Bombay High Court Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction; Somasekhar Sundaresan J.; Vipul Patil Sharmila Enterprises v. Chintamani Construction Company; costs borne equally; merits kept open.
What did the court decide?
Both the Section 11 Application and the Section 9 Petition were finally disposed of: Presolv360 is directed to appoint a sole arbitrator to adjudicate and administer the arbitration arising out of the Salvage Agreement dated June 29, 2010; the Section 9 Petition is converted into a Section 17 Application before the appointed tribunal; proceedings are to be conducted online via the ODR institution; costs are to be borne equally in the first instance subject to the final Award; and the seat remains as discernible from the Agreement (Mumbai), with all merits issues expressly left open.