Mere Use Of "Arbitration" In Heading Does Not Create Binding Clause If Fresh Consent Of Parties Is Required For Reference: Calcutta High Court

Calcutta HC voids arbitration clause in a contract where mere heading mentioned arbitration but lacked fresh consent, emphasizing mutual agreement. The Calcutta High Court ruled that an arbitration clause embedded in a contract's heading, but without clear, separate, and fresh consent from the parties, is invalid. The court emphasized that a valid arbitration agreement requires a distinct and unequivocal meeting of minds, signifying mutual agreement to resolve disputes through arbitration. This decision highlights the importance of drafting arbitration clauses precisely and ensuring explicit consent from all parties to avoid future challenges to the enforceability of such clauses.