Court : Patna
..... arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 the extent of judicial intervention was very clearly defined in section 5 which provided that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, in matters governing arbitration, no judicial authority shall intervene except where so provided. ..... the defendants-petitioners are aggrieved by order dated 17-12-2004 passed in the aforesaid suit, by which learned subordinate judge-viii, patna rejected their petition filed under section 5 read with section 8 of arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the act of 1996 for the sake of brevity) for referring the suit to the arbitrator for final adjudication.3. ..... the arbitration act, 1940 came into force on the 1st day of july, 1940 and it continued to be effective till the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 came into force on 22-8-1996 vide g.s.r. ..... in this connection learned counsel for the petitioners referred to sections 5 and 8 of the act of 1996 in which it is provided that in matters governed by that part, no judicial authority shall intervene except where so provided in that part of the act and that a judicial authority before which an action is brought in a matter which is the subject of an arbitration agreement shall, if a party so applies not later than when submitting his first statement on the substance of the dispute, refer the parties to arbitration.6. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)105BOMLR422
..... that in the aforesaid judgment it is ruled that to the extent the judicial intervention is curtailed by providing in the aforesaid arbitration and conciliation act, it makes abundantly clear that there is non obstante clause that no judicial authority shall intervene except where so provided, shri usgaonkar thereafter pointed out that the main objective of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 was to provide speedy and efficacious remedy to the party and especially in view thereof section 5 was enacted indicating that even the judicial intervention should be expressly restricted only to the areas where ..... apart from that, in paragraph 14 of the aforesaid judgment the supreme court has also emphasised the importance of minimising the supervisory role of court in the arbitral process and this objective has found expression in section 5 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 by restricting judicial intervention to a very limited extent as indicated in section 5 of the act by clearly mentioning that no judicial authority shall intervene except where so provided in this part. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... durga trading corporation13: arbitration is a private dispute resolution mechanism whereby two or more parties agree to resolve their current or future disputes by an arbitral tribunal, as an alternative to adjudication by the courts or a public 12 arbitration and conciliation act, 1996, section 5: 5. ..... this appeal arises out of the decision of the division bench of the high court of bombay under section 37 of the arbitration and conciliation act 1996,1 by which the concurrent findings of the arbitral tribunal and that of the single judge of the high court under section 34 of the act rejecting all claims were set aside and certain claims were allowed. ..... extent of judicial intervention. ..... keeping in mind the mandate of section 5 of the act 1996,12 we note the observation of this court in vidya drolia and ors. v. ..... decision of the high court under section 34 of the act: the respondent s challenge to the arbitral award under section 34 of the act was considered and dismissed by the single judge of the high court by its order dated 17.01.2019. ..... it cannot be said either that it is an unreasonable view or a view which is either impossible or which no fair and judiciously minded person would have taken. ..... notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, in matters governed by this part, no judicial authority shall intervene except where so provided in this part. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Reported in : 2005(4)CTC437; (2005)4MLJ210
..... aggrieved by the orders passed by hon'ble chief justice or his nominee judge in original petitions filed under section 11 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), appointing arbitrators, central government organisations, namely, telecom department, southern railway, western railway, rajiv gandhi national institute, etc. ..... extent of judicial intervention. ..... impartial arbitrator is nominated. 21. ..... an arbitrator the chief justice or his designate must have regard to the qualifications required of the arbitrator in the agreement between the parties and to other considerations that will secure the nomination of an independent and impartial arbitrator.19.the function has been left to the chief justice or his designate advisedly, with a view to ensure that the nomination of the arbitrator is made by a person occupying high judicial office or his designate, who would take due care to see that a competent, independent and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... the provision contained in section 5 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 delineates the extent of judicial intervention by declaring that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, in matters governed by this part, no judicial authority shall intervene except where so provided in this part . ..... since the grounds on which the prayer in the application under section 8 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 in the matter at hand is resisted are also based on the proceedings arising out of the consumer complaint that had been earlier preferred by the plaintiff before the ncdrc, a feeble contention was urged that ncdrc cannot be construed as a judicial authority within the meaning of the expression used in the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996. ..... modi, (1996) 6 scc385 holding, inter alia, that the proceedings before the forums created by the consumer protection act, 1986, including the national commission (ncdrc), are legal proceedings and that such forums are judicial authorities within the meaning of the expression used in section 34 of the arbitration act, 1940 (since replaced by the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996).30. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
..... the learned counsel for the petitioner brings it to the notice of this court that section 5 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 speaks 'extent of judicial intervention' and in fact no judicial authority was intervened except whereso provided in part (1) of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996. 7. ..... further, unless the 'judicial authority' before whom the petition / application is filed under section 8 of the act, is a 'court' as defined within the meaning of section 42 read with clause (e) of section 2 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996, the 'judicial authority' shall not entertain subsequent proceedings arising under the arbitration agreement in view of section 42 of the act. 15. ..... to lend support to the contention that no judicial authority was intervened except whereso provided in part (1) of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996, the learned counsel for the petitioner / defendant (bank) relies on the decision of the hon'ble supreme court reported in air 2003 sc 2881 whereby and whereunder it is observed as follows:- the language of section 8 is peremptory in nature. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 115(2004)DLT345; (2005)139PLR26
..... he has raised the preliminary issue based upon the plea that section 5 of the act limits the extent of judicial intervention except as specified in part i of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996. ..... this is an application under sections 14 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996(hereinafter referred to as `the act'), mainly founded on the plea that the arbitration proceedings against the petitioner were initiated, based upon the consent of the advocate, shri p.k. ..... any and all disputes and/or claims arising under this agreement and/or out of or in connection with the execution, interpretation, performance and/or non performance of this agreement shall be referred to arbitration in accordance with the provisions of the (indian) arbitration and conciliation act 1996 or any reenactment or modification thereof then in force. ..... the relevant sections 14, 16, 34(2)(a)(iii) & (v) of the act read as follows:-'5.extent of judicial intervention._ notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, in matters governed by this part, no judicial authority shall intervene except where so provided in this part.14. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... ) clearly lays down that the civil court does not have the jurisdiction to entertain a suit in which injunction stood against a party to an arbitration agreement and necessarily a party has to be referred to arbitration, but, at the same time, the court in a latter case of world sport group s case (supra) also lays down that the reference of the dispute to an arbitrator is not an absolute proposition because section 45 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 is carrying three provisos namely that the agreement should not be null ..... section 5 reads as under: section 5 - extent of judicial intervention notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, in matters governed by this part, no judicial authority shall intervene except where so provided in this part. 35. ..... firstly, by the arbitral tribunal when the arbitration proceedings have been initiated without the intervention of the court, as is the present case or by the court acting pursuant to section 45 of the act or under section 48 of the act when the award is brought for enforcement.13. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... ) clearly lays down that the civil court does not have the jurisdiction to entertain a suit in which injunction stood against a party to an arbitration agreement and necessarily a party has to be referred to arbitration, but, at the same time, the court in a latter case of world sport group s case (supra) also lays down that the reference of the dispute to an arbitrator is not an absolute proposition because section 45 of the arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 is carrying three provisos namely that the agreement should not be null ..... section 5 reads as under: section 5 - extent of judicial intervention notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, in matters governed by this part, no judicial authority shall intervene except where so provided in this part. 35. ..... firstly, by the arbitral tribunal when the arbitration proceedings have been initiated without the intervention of the court, as is the present case or by the court acting pursuant to section 45 of the act or under section 48 of the act when the award is brought for enforcement.13. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : AIR2004Ori186; 2005(1)ARBLR115(Orissa); 98(2004)CLT304
..... 522 of 2001 was filed by the present petitioner under section 9(ii) (d) and (e) of the arbitration and conciliation, act, 1996 in the court of the district judge, khurda for securing and preserving the property in dispute in arbitration by restraining the opposite parties, particularly opposite party no. ..... 'the extent of judicial intervention has been thus circumscribed by section 5 to the extent as provided in the act itself. ..... extent of judicial intervention.notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, in matters governed by this part, no judicial authority shall intervene except where so provided in this part. ..... thus, judicial intervention having been limited, the court cannot interfere at any or every stage or on a ground other than those available in the act itself. ..... in other words, judicial intervention is prohibited except as provided for in the act. ..... panigrahi, the petition under order 1, rule 10, cpc to implead the necessary parties and the petition for amendment of the mjc petition under order 6, rule 17, cpc were filed to obliterate the stand taken by the respondents in their respective objections filed before the court below to the extent that the mjc petition and the injunction petition were not maintainable due to non-joinder of necessary parties. .....
Tag this Judgment!