Supreme Court: While considering the instant arbitration petition, the 3-Judge Bench of Sanjiv Khanna, CJ., Sanjay Kumar and Joymalya Bagchi, JJ., pointed out that there was there was no agreement on the choice of the appointing authority after the petitioner, Tata Communications Limited, issued notice dated 28-01-2021.
Disposing of the petition, the Court said that Tata Communications Limited, or any other party, would be required to request the Secretary General of the Permanent Court of Arbitration to designate an appointing authority.
While considering the petition, the Court took note of Article 6 of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law Arbitration (UNCITRAL) Rules, 2021 which deal with “Designating and appointing authorities”.
[Tata Communications Ltd. v. Aurora Engineering Company, ARBITRATION PETITION NO. 7/2024, decided on 17-3-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioner(s): Mr. Ratin Rai, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ketan Gaur, Adv. Mr. Neil Chatterjee, Adv. Ms. Aastha Kulshrestha, Adv. Ms. Nidhisha Garg, Adv. Ms. Ritka, Adv. Mr. Jasmeet Singh, AOR
For Respondent(s): Mr. Pranjit Bhattacharya, Adv. Ms. Salonee Shukla, Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Niti, AOR Mr. Shouryabrata Mandal, AOR Mr. Niraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv. Mr. Raghav Agrawal, Adv. Mr. Dhruv Sharma, Adv. Mr. Udit Sidhra, Adv. Ms. Dhanya Setlur Krishnan, Adv. Mr. Saurabh Bindal, Adv. Ms. Akshita Salampuria, Adv. Ms. Akanksha Batra, Adv
