9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Jurisdiction of Arbitrator to proceed with arbitration in view of pending BIFR reference, maintainability of petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, whether decision on stay of arbitration proceedings constitutes an interim award, and challengeability of arbitral Tribunal's jurisdiction ruling before the final award. Analysis: 1. The petitioner challenged the Arbitrator's jurisdiction due to a pending BIFR reference, arguing for a stay in the arbitration proceedings. The respondent contended that the Arbitral Tribunal can rule on its own jurisdiction as per section 16 of the Act. The Tribunal's rejection of jurisdiction plea allows it to continue proceedings, with any challenge to be made under section 34. 2. Section 16 empowers the Arbitral Tribunal to rule on its jurisdiction, and if it rejects a jurisdiction plea, it can proceed with the arbitration. A decision on jurisdiction can only be challenged under section 34. Acceptance of no jurisdiction plea is appealable under section 37(2) of the Act. 3. The petitioner claimed the decision on arbitration proceedings' stay as an interim award under section 2(1)(c) and section 31(6) of the Act. However, the nature of the decision regarding stay does not qualify as an interim award under section 31(6) since it cannot be a subject of a final arbitral award. 4. The Arbitrator's decision on the stay of proceedings questioned its power to adjudicate, essentially raising a jurisdiction issue. The Arbitrator ruling to proceed or not amounts to a jurisdiction ruling as it concerns the power to adjudicate on the subject-matter. 5. The petition under section 34 was deemed not tenable since no award was passed. Referring to a previous judgment, the Court highlighted that challenges to jurisdiction rulings must wait until the final award is made, as established in BASF Styrenics (P.) Ltd. v. Offshore Industrial Construction (P.) Ltd. 6. The Court dismissed the petition, emphasizing that challenges to jurisdiction rulings must follow the Act's scheme, allowing for objections after the arbitration proceedings conclude and the award is made. Dismissal of the petition does not prevent the petitioner from raising legal grounds while challenging the arbitral award in the future.
|
