Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. Vs. Northern Coal Field Ltd. In this case, Supreme Court has held that as enshrined in Section 16 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) and the legislative intent to restrict judicial intervention at pre-reference stage, the Supreme Court held that the issue of limitation would be decided by an arbitrator. It also reaffirmed that the legislative intent of the Arbitration Act is party autonomy and minimal judicial interference in the arbitration process. It observed that the regime of the Arbitration Act outlines that once an arbitrator has been appointed, all objections and issues are to be decided by the arbitrator. The Supreme Court observed that the issue of limitation is a jurisdictional issue which should be decided by the arbitrator in terms of Section 16 of the Arbitration Act and not before the High Court at the pre-reference stage under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act. The Supreme Court observed that once the arbitration agreement is not in dispute, all issue including jurisdictional issues are to be decided by the arbitrator.
The full form of ATM is
How many digits does the IFSC code contain?
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan inaugurated the state-of-the-art Centre for Nanotechnology and Centre for Indian Knowledge System at IIT ___...
How much did Union Bank of India commit to measure in terms of financed emissions through its signing of the PCAF in 2024?
There are some major plan related statements for women empowerment and child development in Uttarakhand, which of the following statements is not correct?
Which of the following lists includes examples of cash crops cultivated in India?
In which year was the Madras High Court established?
Who is the Head of Committee to Review Governance of Boards of Bank by RBI in 2014?
When were the first Paralympic Games held?
The "Kanger Ghati National Park" is located in which state?