In January 2024, Aarohan Pharma Private Ltd ('Aarohan'), a reputed pharmaceutical manufacturer, entered into a contract with Pentagon Lifesciences Ltd ('Pentagon') for the development and supply of a new line of oncology
CS Professional · Arbitration, Mediation and Conciliation · PYQS · December 2025
In January 2024, Aarohan Pharma Private Ltd ('Aarohan'), a reputed pharmaceutical manufacturer, entered into a contract with Pentagon Lifesciences Ltd ('Pentagon') for the development and supply of a new line of oncology drugs. The contract, valued at ₹150 crore, contained detailed provisions on regulatory approvals, manufacturing timelines, quality control standards, penalties for delay, variation in technical specifications and dispute resolution. Clause 21 of the agreement stipulated that disputes would be resolved through arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, with Hyderabad as the seat and proceedings governed by CIAC Rules. By April 2024, disagreements surfaced as Aarohan alleged that Pentagon delayed release of milestone-based payments and failed to provide timely approvals for raw material sourcing protocols, leading to cost overruns. Pentagon countered that Aarohan had missed regulatory submission deadlines, used substandard excipients in certain trial batches, and ignored directions from the joint project monitoring committee. Quality inspections conducted by Pentagon revealed compliance defects in two pilot production runs, which Pentagon relied on to withhold further payments. Tensions escalated and after weeks of negotiation, the parties signed a Settlement Agreement on July 15, 2024. Pentagon agreed to pay Aarohan ₹30 crore in full and final settlement of all claims, while Aarohan agreed to transfer all partially developed product dossiers and trial data to another manufacturer appointed by Pentagon. However, the settlement did not expressly reaffirm or exclude the arbitration clause. In October 2024, Aarohan, aggrieved that the compensation did not cover its actual R&D and manufacturing expenses, issued a Notice of Arbitration invoking Clause 21 of the original contract. Pentagon objected, contending that the settlement agreement had superseded the original contract and extinguished the arbitration clause. Further, Pentagon challenged Aarohan's nominated arbitrator, citing the arbitrator's past professional ties with Aarohan's counsel. Aarohan then approached the Court seeking constitution of an arbitral tribunal, supporting its application with correspondence, invoices and the disputed settlement terms. Based on the above facts, answer the following questions: Outline the essential components in drafting an affidavit in support of Aarohan's application before the court for appointment of an arbitrator.
Answer & Explanation:
Essential components in drafting an affidavit in support of Aarohan's application before the court for appointment of an arbitrator: At the top, write the name of the court, tribunal in which the affidavit is to be submitted, along with the allotted case/suit no. Mention the names of parties in brief. As a heading/title of the document, mention 'AFFIDAVIT' in the bold and underlined font. Thereafter give the details of the deponent (the person who is testifying as to the truth of submissions made by him, in the main petition) such as the name of the deponent and his father, age of deponent and his residential address, followed by 'Do solemnly affirm and declare as under.' In the first paragraph after the introduction, the deponent has to mention that he/she is the plaintiff or the defendant (as the case may be) in the suit for which the affidavit is being submitted and he has to make a declaration that he is fully aware and conversant with the facts of the case and can testify for the same. In the second paragraph, mention that the petition or submission made in the petition has been drafted by the counsel of the deponent and that the contents have been read over in vernacular language, with detailed explanation made to the deponent, along with consequences of the same, been explained to him. Mention in brief the circumstances of the suit or the submission made by the deponent. In case the main petition already contains the details, the same need not be repeated in the affidavit and one can mention that 'contents of the petition are not being repeated here for sake of brevity and therefore one shall consider the same as a part of this affidavit.' Lastly, state that it is the deponent's true and correct statement, followed by a paragraph about verification, which will state that contents of the affidavit are true and correct to the deponent's knowledge and that nothing material has been concealed.
Topics: Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
Related Questions in this Topic
- Explain the recent amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 that have an impact and effect on the drafti...
- Div Studios Ltd entered into an agreement with Astra Broadcasting, a government-owned media network, to produce a realit...
- Onko Metals Inc., a foreign supplier, entered into a contract with Premo Copper Ltd., an Indian company, for the supply ...
- Sterling Minerals Ltd entered into a contract with Nem Infrastructure Private Ltd for excavation work at a predetermined...
- Alpana Tech Private Ltd and Swalpana Solutions Private Ltd, both companies incorporated in India, entered into a contrac...