Commercial Court Cannot Be Regarded As A “Person Or Institution” Under Section 11(6) Of The A&C Act: Bombay High Court

Commercial Court Cannot Be Regarded As A “Person Or Institution” Under Section 11(6) Of The A&C Act

Case: Uttam Energy Ltd. versus Ms. Shivratna Udyog Ltd.

Coram: Justice G.S. Kulkarni

Case No.: Arbitration Petition No. 79 Of 2022

Court Observation: “Thus, to read into sub-section (3) of Section 10 of the Commercial Courts Act to take within its ambit the jurisdiction and power in relation to the appointment of an arbitral tribunal, to be exercised by the Commercial Court exercising territorial jurisdiction over such arbitration, when the exclusive jurisdiction to make appointment of an arbitral tribunal within the meaning of section 11 of the ACA, is conferred on the High Court or the Supreme Court as the case may be under section 11 of the ACA, it would amount to a complete misreading of sub-section (3) of Section 10 of the Commercial Courts Act, and in fact would lead to an absurdity. Such an interpretation can never be accepted in terms of what Section 11 categorically provides qua the powers of the High Court to appoint an arbitral tribunal.”

“It would be absurdity to accept such argument inasmuch as the Commercial court would be a “Court” exercising judicial powers as clear from the provisions of Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Thus, sub-section (6) of Section 11 of the ACA when uses the word “any person or institution” necessarily it would be a person or any institution which is not a Court and which would not have any judicial power and by virtue of such designation under sub-section (6-B) of Section 11, it shall not be regarded as a delegation of judicial power by the Supreme Court or the High Court.”

Previous Posts

Domestic Violence Act | Proceedings Under Section 12 Of DV Act Cannot Be Equated With Lodging A Criminal Complaint: J&K&L High Court

Delhi High Court Directs Centre To Comply With Law While Transporting Camels For Participation In Republic Day Parade

Motor Vehicles Act -Claimant Wheather Gratuitous Or Non- Gratuitous Cannot Fasten Liability On The Insurer Under The Provisions Of Motor Vehicles Act: J&K&L High Court

Preponderance Of Probability & Not Strict Principles Of Proof Like In Criminal Case Applicable In Motor Accident Claims: J&K&L High Court

Provident Fund & Other Pecuniary Benefits Received By Legal Heirs Of Deceased Have No Co-Relation With Motor Accident Claim: J&K&L High Court