Disposed

Transline Technologies Ltd. v. Broadcast Engineering Consultants India Limited (Becil) & Anr.

Delhi HC22 Oct 2024ARB.P./1012/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this arbitration petition filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court appointed a Retired District Court Judge as the arbitrator for disputes arising between the parties regarding an MoU dated 18.12.2020, after mediation failed. The arbitration shall be conducted under the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) rules, and fees as per the DIAC Schedu

What did the court decide?

The Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) requested to appoint a Retired District Court Judge as arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute.

Transline Technologies Ltd. Vs Broadcast Engineering Consultants… — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~3

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 1012/2023

¶4

TRANSLINE TECHNOLOGIES LTD. .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

BROADCAST ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS INDIA LIMITED (BECIL) & ANR ......Respondents Through: Ms. Shruti Sharma, Advocate Mr. Kundan Kumar, Advocate for respondent No.2

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 22.10.2024

¶11

The present petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the Petitioners seeking appointment of an Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes which have arisen between the parties under the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) dated 18.12.2020 entered into between the parties. Under the said Agreement, the Respondent No.1 was appointed as the System Integrator for Fair Price Shop automation across the State of Uttrakhand.

¶12

Material on record indicates that the matter was sent to mediation to settle the dispute amicably between the parties but the mediation has failed.

¶13

Learned Counsel appearing for the Parties are ad idem in submitting that a Retired District Court Judge may be appointed to adjudicate upon the disputes between the Parties.

¶14

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/10/2024 at 14:19:45

¶15

Accordingly, the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) is requested to appoint a Retired District Court Judge to adjudicate upon the disputes between the Parties.

¶16

The arbitration would take place under the aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre (DIAC) and would abide by its rules and regulations. The learned Arbitrator shall be entitled to fees as per the Schedule of Fees maintained by the DIAC.

¶17

The learned Arbitrator is also requested to file the requisite disclosure under Section 12(2) of the 1996 Act within a week of entering on reference. 7. All rights and contentions of the parties in relation to the claims/counter-claims are kept open, to be decided by the learned Arbitrator on their merits, in accordance with law.

¶18

Needless to say, nothing in this order shall be construed as an expression of this Court on the merits of the contentions of the parties.

¶19

The present petition stands disposed of in the above terms along with pending application(s), if any.

¶20

SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD, J

¶21

OCTOBER 22, 2024 S. Zakir

¶22

This is a digitally signed order.

¶23

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 25/10/2024 at 14:19:45

Transline Technologies Ltd. v. Broadcast Engineering Consultants India Limited (Becil) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Transline Technologies Ltd. v. Broadcast Engineering Consultants India Limited (Becil) & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashish Jain Vs Jatinder Kumar Jain & Ors.

Ashish Jain Vs Jatinder Kumar Jain & Anr.

Shree Bhagwan Builders Vs Union of India

Siddharth Kak Vs Prasar Bharati

Moneywise Financial Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ekam Chemicals & Ors.

Overnite Express Limited Vs Delhi Metro Rail Corporation