In an arbitration petition seeking change of the sole arbitrator, the High Court of Orissa declined to grant relief, noting that the amended provision of the Arbitration Act benefited the opposite party. The petition was dismissed.
Petition for change of arbitrator dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ARBP No.10 of 2019
DLF Cybercity, Bhubaneswar
…. Petitioner Mr. B.B. Mishra, Advocate
-versus-
M/s DLF Ltd. and another
…. Opposite Parties
CORAM:
THE CHIEF JUSTICE
ORDER
11.06.2021
Order No.
Page 1 of 2
// 2 //
(Dr. S. Muralidhar) Chief Justice
S.K. Guin
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a change of the sole arbitrator appointed by the opposite party based on the dispute resolution clause after the amendment of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
DLF Cybercity, Bhubaneswar
M/s DLF Ltd.
Dr. S. Muralidhar
S.K. Guin
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
