Failure to Mutually Agree on an Arbitrator Permits Court Appointment Under the Arbitration Clause.

The petitioner filed a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from an agreement dated 18 February 2023.

Clause 14 provided for arbitration by a sole arbitrator, to be appointed by mutual agreement or, failing agreement, by a court of competent jurisdiction

The respondent had sought time to file a reply but had not filed one by the hearing; it proposed mediation, which the petitioner declined

The Court proceeded to consider appointment of an arbitrator

1. Whether a valid arbitration agreement existed between the parties for disputes arising from the agreement dated 18 February 2023

2. Whether the Court should appoint a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Act

Under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Court’s enquiry is confined to examining the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement

Section 12(2) requires the appointed arbitrator to furnish the requisite disclosure

The Court also applied Clause 14 of the parties’ agreement, which provided for disputes to be referred to a sole arbitrator, with appointment by mutual agreement or, if that failed, by a court of competent jurisdiction.

No judicial precedent was cited.

The Court found that Clause 14 constituted a valid arbitration clause and that there was no dispute regarding its existence; it also recorded that the parties were ad idem as to referring their disputes to arbitration

Finding no impediment to appointment, the Court appointed a sole arbitrator.

It left questions of arbitrability and jurisdiction, as well as the merits of claims and counterclaims, for determination by the arbitrator

The arbitration was directed to proceed under the rules and aegis of the Delhi International Arbitration Centre, with fees as per its schedule

All pleas, including objections to arbitrability and jurisdiction, were left open for the arbitrator, and the arbitrator was directed to decide the disputes independently on their merits