Limitation objections to claims under an arbitration agreement are for the arbitrator to decide.

The parties entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) dated 12 September 2012 concerning the development of certain properties.

Clause 9 provided for arbitration, while paragraph 7 set out options for dealing with any remaining property after two years.

Alleging that the respondents had violated the MOU, the petitioner issued a notice invoking arbitration under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, on 10 July 2025.

The respondents did not respond, and the petitioner applied under Section 11(5) for appointment of a sole arbitrator.

The respondents objected that the MOU was valid for only two years, that the claim was time-barred, and that no dispute existed.

Whether the respondents’ limitation objection barred appointment of an arbitrator at the Section 11 stage.

Whether a dispute had arisen under the MOU and warranted appointment of a sole arbitrator.

Section 11(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, empowers the Court to appoint an arbitrator where the parties’ agreed appointment process has not resulted in an appointment; Section 21 concerns commencement of arbitral proceedings upon receipt of a request to refer the dispute to arbitration.

Relying on Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited v. Nortel Networks India Pvt. Ltd., AIR 2021 SC 2849, the Court noted that the arbitral tribunal can adjudicate issues including limitation.

The Court also proceeded on the basis that a dispute arising in relation to the MOU and covered by its arbitration clause could be referred to arbitration.

The parties’ MOU contained an arbitration clause, and the petitioner had invoked it by serving a Section 21 notice.

The parties disputed their respective rights concerning property remaining after the two-year period under paragraph 7 of the MOU; the Court found that the petitioner denied the respondents’ position and that the material, including an earlier suit, showed a dispute between them.

The limitation objection did not prevent appointment because, as the Court understood Nortel Networks, limitation could be adjudicated by the arbitrator.

It allowed the petition and appointed Shri Ravindra M. Joshi, former District Judge, as sole arbitrator through the Arbitration and Conciliation Centre (Domestic & International), Bengaluru.

All claims and contentions were left open for determination.