AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 285 wordsSurjit Singh, J.
OMP No. 22/2010
Heard and gone through the record.
Order dated 28th August, 2009 appointing an Arbitrator, on the failure of the Respondent to appoint one, in terms of agreement, has been assailed in the present Review Petition, on the ground that this Court did not have the jurisdiction over the matter, referred to the Arbitrator. There is no provision for the review of an order passed by the Chief Justice or the Judge designated by the Chief Justice, u/s 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Also, there is a judgment by the Hon''ble Apex Court, in the matter of M/s S.B.P. and Co. v. Patel Engineering Ltd. and Anr. AIR 2006 Supreme Court 450, to the effect that an order passed by the Chief Justice or the Judge designated by the Chief Justice, u/s 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is a judicial order and it cannot be challenged in the same Court, by filing a petition, under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, and it being a judicial order, the only remedy available to the aggrieved person is to approach the Hon''ble Supreme Court, under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, where the order is passed by the Chief Justice or the Judge designated by the Chief Justice and that no remedy is available where the order is passed by the Chief Justice of India. There is no provision of review of an order passed, u/s 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, by the Chief Justice of the High Court or the Judge designated by him.
In view of the abovestated position, the present petition is dismissed.