Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration Act is Barred by Limitation if Invoked After 32 Years

CASE: Vishram Varu and ors. v. Union of India

BENCH: Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna

SECTION 11(6): Procedure for appointment of the Arbitrator by the Supreme Court after exhaustion of appointment procedure in the Agreement/Contract.

The Supreme Court recently held that an application for appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Act") is barred by limitation if it is invoked 32 years after the dispute.

The above was held while considering an appeal where the dispute arose in 1985, but the appellant invoked section 11 (6) of the Act 32 years later by sending legal notices. In 1985, the appellant executed work for the respondent. In 2018, the ap0070ellant sent a letter to the respondent seeking payment for excess work or to refer the matter to the arbitration tribunal. After receiving no response, the appellant sent a legal notice to the respondent in 2019 seeking the appointment of an arbitrator by the senior officer of the respondent.

However, the respondent did not respond to the legal notice, prompting the appellant to approach the Calcutta High Court under Section 11(6). The HC dismissed the matter citing that "the arbitration petition in 2019 is hopelessly barred by limitation."

Subsequently, the appellant approached the Supreme Court with this instant appeal. The bench, however, dismissed the appeal stating notice sent in 2019 cannot be a ground to claim to apply to Section 11(6) of the Act accrued in 2019.