2023 (12) TMI 1373 - HC - Indian Laws

Challenge the appointment of Arbitrator on the part of the respondent Insurance Company - whether the dispute is arbitrable can be decided at the stage of section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996? - HELD THAT - Reliance is placed on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Magic Eye Developers Private Limited vs. Green Edge Infrastructure Private Limited and others, 2023 (5) TMI 510 - SUPREME COURT , where it was held that ' When the claim is disputed, it is the arbitrator who may competently decide the claim. Arbitrability of the dispute is also to be decided by the arbitrator. While exercising the powers under section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, such questions cannot be gone into by this Court and when there is an arbitration clause, the aspects are to be decided by the arbitrator for such purpose.' This Court does not find any reason to reconsider the contention of the respondent insurance company that the dispute is non-arbitrable inasmuch, as consent letter has been sent by the petitioner on 24.12.2018 and payment had been received in January, 2019 without any protest. Petition allowed.

Summary

The High Court upheld the appointment of an arbitrator to resolve disputes between the parties. The respondent's argument that the dispute was non-arbitrable was rejected. Former Judge Mr. K.A. Puj was appointed as the sole arbitrator in accordance with the Arbitration Centre Rules.