0

The matter to Arbitral institution is sufficient; party not required to name Arbitrator: Karnataka High Court.

This particular decision is held by the High Court Of Karnataka through the single bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj in the case of M/s Geosmin Studio Sustainable Solutions LLP versus M/s Ethnus Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd.

Facts

Both Petitioner and respondent entered into an agreement for ‘Interior Architectural Services and Construction’, which contained an Arbitration Clause. After certain disputes arose between the parties, petitioner approached the Council of Architecture for appointment of an Arbitrator. However, the Council rejected the claim of the petitioner for appointment of an Arbitrator on the ground that the petitioner being an LLP cannot be a member of the Council, and on the ground that one of the partners of the said LLP was not an architect.

since the Council of Architecture had refused to appoint an Arbitrator on the ground that one of the partners of the petitioner firm was not an architect and on the ground that the petitioner, being an LLP, could not be a member of the Council.

Orders and judgements 

The Council of Architecture had refused to appoint an Arbitrator on the ground that the petitioner was registered as an LLP. The Court further noted that the Council had denied the claim of the petitioner to appoint an Arbitrator on the ground that one of the partners of the petitioner firm was not an architect, which was disputed by the petitioner.

The Court ruled that even if one of the partners is an architect registered with the Council of Architecture, the said Council would have the jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator. The Court, thus directed the Council of Architecture to consider the request of the petitioner for appointment of an Arbitrator.

The Court added that a party to an arbitration is entitled to make the contentions which are legally permissible, but not malafide arguments.

The Court ruled that there is no specific requirement that a party should name an arbitrator, and it is sufficient if there is a mention made to refer the matter to the institution for arbitration.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Judgement reviewed by- Mohammed Shoaib

Click here to view the judgement 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Open chat