2011 (10) TMI 735 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues involved: Jurisdiction of the Court for appointment of Arbitrator u/s 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.

Summary:
The case involved an Arbitration Application filed u/s 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 for the appointment of an Arbitrator regarding a dispute arising from a contract dated 1.10.2002 between the applicant-Company and a non-applicant Company, now merged with Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. The dispute arose due to the accumulation of unsold stock by the applicant-Company and disagreements over stock quantities and payments. The applicant-Company requested resolution or arbitration as per the agreement's Clause 17.0, but the non-applicant Company did not respond, leading to the current application.

Objections raised:
1. The non-applicant Company raised objections regarding the validity of the arbitration agreement u/s 7 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996.
2. The non-applicant Company argued that the agreement specified Kolkata Courts' jurisdiction, implying exclusion of other Courts' jurisdiction.

Legal arguments:
The non-applicant Company cited a Supreme Court judgment regarding an Ouster clause, emphasizing the intention to exclude other Courts' jurisdiction when a specific jurisdiction is mentioned in a contract. The judgment discussed the application of the maxim 'expressio unius est exclusio alterius' in such cases.

Court's decision:
After considering the arguments and the agreement's Clause No. 18 specifying Kolkata Courts' jurisdiction, the Court inferred the intention to exclude other Courts' jurisdiction. Citing a Supreme Court judgment, the Court concluded that it lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the application and dismissed it, advising the applicant to file the Arbitration Application at Kolkata High Court.

This summary highlights the key issues, arguments, and the Court's decision regarding the jurisdiction for appointing an Arbitrator in the case.