Quashed

M/S Abl Biotechnologies Ltd. & Ors. v. M/S Technology Development Board & Anr.

Delhi HC19 Nov 2018O.M.P./607/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Bench allowed a petition under the Arbitration Act quashing an award rendered by an arbitrator unilaterally appointed by the respondent. Relying on Supreme Court precedent, the Court held that such an appointment is a nullity irrespective of pre-2015 amendment timelines.

What did the court decide?

The impugned award was quashed and set aside; the petition was allowed.

M/S Abl Biotechnologies Ltd. & Ors. Vs M/S Technology Development… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2018)

¶1

$~10

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- O.M.P. 607/2010

¶4

M/S ABL BIOTECHNOLOGIES LTD & ORS .....Petitioners

¶5

Through: Mr. Abid Ali Beeran, Advocate

¶6

versus

¶7

M/S TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT BOARD & ANR .....Respondents Through: Mr. Jivesh Mehta, Mr. Nihit Dalmia and Mr. Bhavya Bathla, Advocates for R1

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR

¶9

JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 19.09.2024

¶10

1. Mr. Abid Ali Beeran, learned counsel for the petitioners, points out that the Arbitrator, who has passed the impugned award in the present case, was unilaterally appointed by Respondent 1.

¶11

2. This position is not disputed by Mr. Jivesh Mehta, learned counsel for Respondent 1, who, however, seeks to submit that the appointment took place prior to the insertion, in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996¹ , of sub-section (5) by Section 8(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015, with effect from 23 October 2015.

¶12

3. It is now settled by the judgment of the Supreme Court in

¶13

1 “the 1996 Act”, hereinafter Signature Not Ver ified Digitally Signed By:AJITO.M.P. 607/2010 KUMAR Signing Da te:2 0.09.2024 18:56:21

¶14

Signature Not Verified

¶15

Page 1 of 2 Digitally Signed By:CHANDRASHEKHARAN HARI SHANKAR Signing Date: 20.0 9.2024 18:54:02

¶16

Dharma Prathishthanam v. Madhok Construction Pvt Ltd² , which has been followed by this Bench in S.K. Builders v CLS Construction Pvt Ltd³ that, even in respect of arbitrations which commenced prior to introduction of sub-section (5) and Section 12 of the 1996 Act, arbitrators could not be unilaterally appointed and any arbitration by a unilaterally appointed arbitrator would be a nullity ab initio .

¶17

4. Accordingly, as the impugned award has been passed by an Arbitrator who was unilaterally appointed by the respondents, the award stands vitiated in its entirety.

¶18

5. The award is accordingly quashed and set aside.

¶19

6. The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.

¶20

C.HARI SHANKAR, J

¶21

SEPTEMBER 19, 2024/yg Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶22