In Brief
The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's challenges to the appointments of Justices K.K. Lahoti and T.S. Doabia as arbitrators in a contract dispute under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Court held that Justice Lahoti's prior legal opinion to GAIL in an unrelated matter did not constitute a "business relationship" disqualifying him under Item 1 of the Seventh Schedule. Justice Doabia's prior arbitration award between the same parties in an earlier period did not amount to "previous involvement in the case" under Item 16; such prior arbitral involvement is distinguished from prior involvement in the dispute itself. The Court clarified that the Seventh Schedule creates absolute ineligibility for certain conflicts, distinct from justifiable doubts under the Fifth Schedule, and that arbitrators are presumed capable of bringing an open mind to each case."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.