Breaking Supreme Court Legal Update
New Delhi · Friday, 31 July 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2024-11-07 allowed

ASLAM ISMAIL KHAN DESHMUKH vs ASAP FLUIDS PVT. LTD. & ANR

Bench: 3 — Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J.B. Pardiwala, Manoj Misra

In Brief

A shareholder of ASAP Fluids Pvt. Ltd. sought appointment of an arbitrator to resolve disputes over the issuance of share certificates under a 2011 Shareholders Agreement. The respondent companies argued the claims were time-barred. The Supreme Court held that referral courts at Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act must examine only whether a prima facie arbitration agreement exists and whether the application itself meets the three-year limitation period. Courts must not conduct intricate enquiries into whether substantive claims are time-barred—this is exclusively the arbitrator's domain. The Court allowed the petitions and appointed a sole arbitrator, but noted the tribunal may impose costs on the shareholder if it ultimately finds the claims time-barred.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Arbitration Limitation Act Procedural Law Shareholders Agreement Appointment of Arbitrator Judicial Interference at Section 11 Stage

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login