HRD CORPORATION Vs. GAIL (INDIA) LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HRD Corporation (Marcus Oil and Chemical Division) (hereafter 'HRD'), a Corporation organised and existing under the laws of the State of Texas, USA, has filed the present petitions under Sec. 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter 'the Act'), inter alia, seeking termination of the mandate of Justice Tejinder Singh Doabia (Retired), Justice K.K. Lahoti (Retired) as arbitrators comprising of arbitral tribunal of three members. According to HRD, circumstances exist which give rise to justifiable doubts as to the independence and impartiality of the said arbitrators. It is also claimed that the arbitrators are ineligible under Sec. 12(5) of the Act and this would warrant termination of the mandate of the said arbitrators and appointment of two other arbitrators in their place.

(2.) Briefly stated, the relevant facts necessary to address the controversy are as under:-

(3.) The two applications filed by HRD under Sec. 12 - one seeking termination of the mandate of Justice Doabia and the other seeking termination of Justice Lahoti - were heard by the arbitral tribunal on 05.01.2017 and orders thereon were reserved. On 16.02.2017, the arbitral tribunal rejected HRD's application dated 211.2016 seeking termination of the mandate of Justice Doabia (Retired) by majority of 2:1, with Justice Mukul Mudgal (Retired) dissenting. HRD's application dated 26.11.2016 seeking termination of the mandate of Justice K.K. Lahoti (Retired), was unanimously dismissed by the arbitral tribunal. Each of the arbitrators entered separate orders in respect of HRD's aforesaid applications.