2008 AIR SCW 5939 ::2008 CLC 1511 (SC) ::(2008) 3 ArbiLR 349 ::2009 BomCRSup 396 ::2008 (10) SCC 240 ::(2009) 1 RecCivR 306 ::(2008) 11 Scale 500 ::(2008) 72 All LR 920 ::(2008) 4 All WC 3689 ::(2009) 1 Mad LW 989 ::(2008) 7 Mad LJ 1240 ::AIR 2009 SC (Supp) 839 ::(2008) 69 AllIndCas 21 (SC) ::(2008) ILR(ker) 4 SC 323

Supreme Court Of India

(From: Delhi)*

Hon'ble Judge(s): Arijit Pasayat, P. Sathasivam, Aftab Alam , JJJ

Arbitration and Conciliation Act (26 of 1996) , S.11(6), S.11(8)— Power of Court to appoint arbitrator u/S.11(6) - Parameters - Not mandatory to appoint named arbitrator - Appointment without due regard to twin requirements of S.11(8) - Not sustainable. A. A. No. 189 of 2005, D/- 11-05-2006, (Delhi), Reversed. The appointment of the arbitrator or arbitrators named in the arbitration agreement is not a must, but while making the appointment the twin requirements of sub-section (8) of Section 11 have to be kept in view, considered and taken into account. If it is not done, the appointment becomes vulnerable. A. A. No. 189 of 2005, D/- 11-05-2006 (Delhi), Reversed.(Para 13) @page-SCW5940 The crucial expression "a party may request the Chief Justice or any person or institution designated by him to take the necessary measures" in S. 11 (6) has to read along with requirement in sub-section (8) that the Chief Justice or the person or an institution designated by him in appointing an arbitrator shall have "due regard" to the two cumulative conditions relating to qualifications and other considerations as are likely to secure the appointment of an independent and impartial arbitrator.(Para 10) A bare reading of the scheme of Section 11 shows that the emphasis i....