Full Judgment for Online Subscribers (Click to subscribe)
(i) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12(5) proviso – Arbitrator – Ineligibility of – Waiver – The proviso to Section 12(5) is unambiguous – A party can waive its right to object to the ineligibility of an arbitrator under Section 12(5), but the same is subject to two conditions – First, that the waiver is required to be by and done by an express agreement in writing; and second, that such agreement is entered into after the disputes have arisen – Unless both the aforesaid conditions are satisfied, there can be no waiver of the ineligibility of an arbitrator – Waiver of a right to object to ineligibility of an arbitrator under Section 12(5) of the A&C Act cannot be inferred by conduct of a party. [Para 7, 8]
(ii) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 12(5) – Arbitrator – Ineligibility of – Unilateral appointment of an arbitrator without the consent of the other party(ies) – A person who is ineligible to act an Arbitrator, lacks the inherent jurisdiction to render an Arbitral Award under the Act – A decision, by any authority, which lacks inherent jurisdiction to make such a decision, cannot be considered as valid – Such an impugned award cannot be enforced. [Para 14]
(iii) limitation Act, S. 5- Delay – Condonation of delay – 68 days – Explanation provided “due to delay in obtaining necessary required documents from the bank ( petitioner) – No material to show that the appellant was impeded in any manner in retrieving the documents available with it – Any delay or procrastination in taking necessary steps for recovering the documents from its own office cannot be a ground for condoning the delay unless certain extenuating circumstances exist – Also the necessary documents based on which the appeal was filed were readily available with the appellant – Dismissed. [Para 15-18]
