In Brief
Pravin Electricals was sued by Galaxy Infra under an alleged Consultancy Agreement dated 7 July 2014 for non-payment of commissions. Galaxy sought arbitration under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act. The Delhi High Court, relying on correspondence and invoices, concluded an arbitration agreement existed and appointed an arbitrator. The Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's conclusive finding of an arbitration agreement but upholding the appointment of the arbitrator. The Court held that at the Section 11(6) stage, only a prima facie examination is required; when facts are genuinely disputed and forensic evidence is inconclusive, the arbitrator should determine existence of the arbitration agreement as a preliminary issue after detailed examination and cross-examination of witnesses.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.