Disputes arose between the parties, the appellant claiming that GAIL had wrongfully withheld supplies of wax, as a result of which the appellant invoked the arbitration clause included in the agreement.
These two applications were heard and disposed of by an order dated February 16, 2017.
Mrs. Abhisaar Bairagi, Adv.The appellant successfully tendered for the said companytract and the parties entered into an agreement dated April 1, 1999.
Justice A.B. Rohatgi resigned on February 17, 2013 as the presiding arbitrator, as a result of which Justice S.S. Chadha was appointed to fill his vacancy.
For Respondent s Mrs. Vanita Bhargava, Adv.
For the period 2007 2010, a second arbitration was held companysisting of the same panel as the first arbitration.
For the period 2004 2007, an Arbitral Tribunal companysisting of Justice A.B. Rohatgi presiding arbitrator , Justice J.K. Mehra and Justice N.N. Goswamy published an award on April 8, 2006 in which they directed specific performance of the agreement dated April 1, 1999.
Ms. Aparajita Swarup, Adv.
Three earlier arbitrations have taken place between the parties.
The respondent appointed Justice Doabia, and Justice Doabia and Justice K. Ramamoorthy appointed Justice K.K. Lahoti to be the presiding arbitrator, before Justice K. Ramamoorthy withdrew from the case.
In respect of the period from 2016 to 2019, initially, the appellant numberinated Justice K. Ramamoorthy as its arbitrator.
However, he withdrew from the case on December 14, 2016 and Justice Mukul Mudgal was numberinated as arbitrator in his place.
The appellant has filed a petition under Section 34 of the Act assailing the said awards, which is pending before the Delhi High Court.
For Petitioner s Mr. Shailendra Swarup, AOR Ms. Bindu Saxena, Adv.
F. Nariman, J. Leave granted.
For the period 2010 2013, the same Arbitral Tribunal was companystituted.
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by NATARAJAN Briefly stated, the relevant facts necessary to decide this case Date 2017.08.31 170357 IST Reason are as follows.
This award was never challenged and has since become final.
Justice Lahoti, with whom Justice Doabia companycurred, held that they were entitled to companytinue with the arbitration.
The respondent, GAIL India , issued a numberice inviting tenders for supply of wax generated at GAILs plant at Pata, Uttar Pradesh for a period of 20 years on an exclusive basis.
This third arbitration proceeding culminated into two separate awards, both dated July 22, 2015.
Mr. Ajay Bhargava, Adv.
Two applications have been filed by the appellant under Section 12 of the Act, one seeking termination of the mandate of Justice Doabia and the other seeking termination of the mandate of Justice Lahoti.
However, while the proceedings were pending, Justice Goswamy expired and Justice T.S. Doabia was appointed in his place.
