CLOSE
20 December 2021| Cement Corporation of India v. Promac Engineering Industries Limited | OMP (I) (Comm.) 410 of 2021 | Vibhu Bakhru J | Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has reiterated its view that a procedural order by the tribunal concerning arbitral fees cannot be challenged in a petition under Section 9 ACA. The arbitrator had fixed separate fees for counter-claims, which according to the petitioner, was not permissible as the total fee payable would exceed the maximum fees under the Fourth Schedule.
The court referred to its prior decision among the same parties concerning another arbitration. An identical petition was dismissed [OMP (I) Comm) 362 of 2020] by another single judge, and the appellate court upheld that dismissal [FAO (OS) (Comm) No. 92 of 2021].
See also highlight here of Madras High Court’s similar decision (against the imposition of costs) in Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. 2021 SCC OnLine Mad 4906.
See also highlight here of Delhi High Court’s decision in Afcons [OMP (T) Comm. 37 of 2021] that says tribunal can fix fees separately for the counter-claim.
Read the decision here.
Categories: Appealable Orders | Arbitral Fees | Costs | Counterclaim | Deposits | Fees | Fourth Schedule | Interim Measures by Court | Section 31 (8) ACA | Section 31A ACA | Section 38 (1) ACA | Section 38 ACA | Section 9 (1) (ii) (e) ACA | Section 9 ACA