The judgment, delivered by Justice Subramonium Prasad on March 19, 2025, emphasized the critical importance of independence and impartiality in arbitration proceedings, striking down appointments that violate fundamental principles of equal treatment.
Key Highlights of the Judgment
The cases centered around disputes between Apex Buildsys Ltd and two different contractors, with the primary contention being the unilateral appointment of arbitrators. Justice Prasad meticulously examined the appointments and found them to be problematic on multiple grounds.
Legal Principles Established
The court relied on several Supreme Court precedents to reinforce its decision, particularly highlighting that:
- Mere participation in arbitration proceedings does not constitute waiver of objections to arbitrator appointment.
- There must be an "express agreement in writing" to validate a potentially controversial arbitrator appointment.
- Independence and impartiality are cardinal principles in the arbitration framework.
Critical Observations
Justice Prasad noted that "unilateral appointment of arbitrator cuts at the very root of these principles and is antithetical to the idea of equal treatment of parties by the Arbitrator."
The judgment cited the Supreme Court's view that "an independent mind is indispensable in the exercise of judicial power," emphasizing that arbitrators must rise above partisan interests.
Dispute Details
In both cases, Apex Buildsys Ltd had initiated arbitration proceedings related to construction projects:
- Shakti Pump India Ltd's case involved a Works Contract for Construction of PEB Project from 2011
- Vadera Interiors and Exteriors' dispute concerned a Pre-Engineered Building project at Maharajpur, Gwalior
The arbitrators were initially appointed unilaterally by the company's director, which became the central point of legal contention.
Implications for Arbitration Practice
The judgment sends a strong message to corporate entities about the importance of fair and transparent arbitrator selection. It reinforces that:
- Arbitrator appointments must ensure procedural equality
- Parties cannot circumvent established legal standards through unilateral appointments
- True independence requires going beyond mere formal neutrality
By invalidating these arbitrator appointments, the Delhi High Court has reaffirmed the fundamental principles of natural justice and procedural fairness in dispute resolution mechanisms.
The ruling serves as a critical reminder that the arbitration process must maintain the highest standards of impartiality and equal treatment.
Read The Judgment Here
keywords: Arbitrator Appointment, Delhi High Court, Construction Dispute, Procedural Fairness, Judicial Independence, Apex Buildsys
