The Delhi High Court expounded that at the stage of Section 11 petition under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, this Court is only required to see the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and is not to adjudicate upon the merits of the case. It was also held that in case the seat of arbitration is at three places, the parties are at liberty to approach any one of the said three places.

Case Brief:

The present petition has been filed to seek appointment of Arbitral Tribunal.

As per the Petitioner, a purchase order was executed between the Parties along with Standard Terms and Conditions for Transport Agreement to the Purchase Order.

Contentions of the Respondent: 

It was argued that there was no arbitration agreement between the parties. Further, that the Purchase Order was never accepted by the respondent.

It was also contended that no part of cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court and it shall only be the Courts at Gujarat, where cause of action has arisen, which will have jurisdiction to entertain the Section 11 application.

Observations of the Court: 

It was observed that at the stage of Section 11 petition, this Court is only required to see the prima facie existence of an arbitration agreement and is not to adjudicate upon the merits of the case.

It was ruled that the arbitration clause in the present case clearly stated that the seat of arbitration is Goa, Karnataka or Delhi. It merely gave a choice to the parties to invoke the jurisdiction of either of these courts. There was no ambiguity in the clause, as it intended for the parties to choose either of these jurisdictions to govern the arbitration proceedings invoked by parties.

It was held that in case the seat of arbitration is at three places, the parties are at liberty to approach any one of the said three places.

The decision of the Court: 

Based on facts and findings, the petition was accordingly allowed.

Case Title: Vedanta Limited v. Shreeji Shipping

Case No.: ARB.P. 342/2023

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jasmeet Singh

Advocates for Petitioner: Advs. Mr. Krishendu Dutta, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Anurag Tandon, Mr. Rajat Sinha, Mr. Shiva Pande

Advocates for Respondent: Advs. Mr. Navin Pahwa, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Aastha Mehta, Mr. Yash Goyal, Ms. Prerna Mohapatra

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You cannot copy content of this page