Recently the Bombay High Court in Thyssen Krupp v. SD Industries came to an interesting conclusion on appointment of arbitrators. The question before the bench was if the the arbitrators appointed by the parties failed to agree on the presiding arbitrator within the prescribed period of 30 days, whether it was open for them to reach such agreement on a later date or whether the Chief Justice acting under Section 11 would have exclusive right to appoint the presiding arbitrator. The court held that the passage of the prescribed thirty day period does not strip the arbitrators of their power to appoint the presiding arbitrator.
Some interesting observations on the judgment have been posted by Shantanu Naravane on Indian Corporate Law Blog. I will shortly be back with my own comments on the judgment.
No comments:
Post a Comment