Allowed

Mankind Pharma Ltd. v. August Purple Services Pvt. Ltd.

Delhi HC23 Jan 2024ARB.P./97/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court, upon reference for appointment of an arbitrator under Sections 11(6) and 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, appointed a retired Sessions Judge as the Sole Arbitrator despite the parties lacking consensus on appointment, while allowing them to raise objections later.

What did the court decide?

Ms. R. Kiran Nath, District & Sessions Judge (Retired), appointed as Sole Arbitrator.

Mankind Pharma Ltd. Vs August Purple Services Pvt. Ltd. — Arbitration | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~31

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- ARB.P. 97/2024, I.A. 1694/2024

¶4

MANKIND PHARMA LTD

¶5

..... Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Harshbir Singh Kohli, Advocate. versus

¶7

AUGUST PURPLE SERVICES PVT. LTD

¶8

..... Respondent Through: Mr. Ananya Kumar, Advocate.

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

O R D E R

23.01.2024

Fresh Petition under Section 11(6) and 8 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner.

¶15

It is submitted in the petition that the parties had entered into an Agreement dated 04.11.2020 which contains an Arbitration Clause. Disputes arisen between the parties. Notice of Invocation of Arbitration was sent on 01.04.2023 followed by another Notice dated 18.04.2023 and 12.07.2023. But since the parties were not consensus ad idem for appointment of the Arbitrator, the present petition has been filed.

¶16

Learned counsel for the respondent has appeared on advance Notice and has submitted that there is also a dispute in regard to service of Notice of Invocation. He further submits that without prejudice to his rights and contentions, he has no objection to the appointment of the Arbitrator.

¶17

In view of the submissions made and also considering that there is a valid arbitration clause in the Agreement, Ms. R. Kiran Nath, District &

¶18

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 15/06/2024 at 11:48:18

¶19

Sessions Judge (Retired), Mobile No.9910384659, is hereby appointed as the Sole Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties.

¶20

The parties are at liberty to raise their respective objections before the Arbitrator.

¶21

This is subject to the Arbitrator making necessary disclosure as under Section 12(1) of A&C Act, 1996 and not being ineligible under Section 12(5) of the A&C Act, 1996.

¶22

The fees of the learned Arbitrator would be fixed in accordance with the Fourth Schedule to A&C Act, 1996 or as consented by the parties.

¶23

Learned counsels for the parties are directed to contact the learned Arbitrator within one week of being communicated a copy of this Order to them by the Registry.

¶24

A copy of this Order be also forwarded to the learned Arbitrator, for information.

¶25

The petition is accordingly disposed of in the above terms.

¶26

NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA, J

¶27

JANUARY 23, 2024/va

¶28

This is a digitally signed order.

¶29

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 15/06/2024 at 11:48:18

Mankind Pharma Ltd. v. August Purple Services Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mankind Pharma Ltd. v. August Purple Services Pvt. Ltd.

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

Sh. Rajan Kumar Kalia Vs Sh. Parvez Kalia

Mohd Aijaz & Ors. Vs Nasir Usman & Ors.

Mala Rajan Vs Mr Ashok Sharma

Rita Pawa Vs Prabha Chawla & Ors.

M/S Satya Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Delhi Buildtech Pvt. Ltd.

M/S Satkartar Tour N Travels Vs the Directorate of Enforcement