Right To Seek Arbitration Not Lost Just Because Arbitration Clause Became Inoperable Due To Statutory Amendment: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that the invalidity or inoperability of an arbitration clause, such as one naming an ineligible arbitrator under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, does not nullify the underlying arbitration agreement between the parties. The Court clarified that in such cases, the Court is empowered to step in and appoint a neutral arbitrator under Section...

[Arbitration Act] S.11 Application Is Maintainable Even Without Notice U/S 21 If Other Party Is Aware Of Dispute: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court Jaipur Bench has held that a Section 11 petition under the A&C Act without issuing the notice invoking arbitration (“NIA”) u/s 21 of the A&C Act would be maintainable if the Respondents were aware of the dispute being referred to arbitration. The bench noted that the Respondents were well-versed in the dispute raised by the Petitioner. They could...

HCL Infosystems Wins ₹102.81 Crore Arbitral Award Against UIDAI

HCL Infosystems, a HCL Group company, informed the stock exchanges on Sunday that it has received a ₹102.81 crore arbitration award in its favour against the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).The award covers dues, deductions, and additional costs for Managed Service Provider (MSP) services provided between August 7, 2019, and August 6, 2021. It includes 10% annual interest up...

Power Of High Court To Extend Arbitrator's Mandate Is “Co-Extensive” With Power To Appoint Arbitrator: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court has held that when an arbitrator is appointed by the High Court under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), an application under section 29A(4) seeking extension of the mandate of the arbitrator can be entertained by the High Court only and not by the Principal Civil Court or Commercial Court having territorial jurisdiction...

Single Petition U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Is Maintainable Against Composite Arbitral Award: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that a single petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) is maintainable challenging a composite arbitral award disposing of multiple references. A bench led by Justice Shampa Sarkar held that “the Court does not hesitate to hold that the learned arbitrator and the parties understood the proceeding before...

Arbitration Monthly Digest: September 2025

Supreme Court Arbitration | Delivery Of Award To Govt Official Not Connected With Case Doesn't Amount To Valid Service On State : Supreme Court Cause Title: M/S. MOTILAL AGARWALA Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ANR. Citation : 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 867 The Supreme Court has clarified that when the government or one of its departments is a party to arbitration, delivery...

Proceedings For Conciliation & Arbitration Under MSME Act Cannot Be Clubbed: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has set set aside two ex-parte orders passed by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSEFC), Daman holding that the council acted in breach of mandatory two stage procedures under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (“MSMED Act”). The court remitted the matter for fresh arbitration in accordance with law. A bench led...

[Arbitration Act] Doctrine Of Merger Inapplicable When Superior Forum Has Not Decided Issue In Question: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court held that the doctrine of merger does not preclude the decree holder from claiming post award interest at 18% under section 31(7)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act). The court quashed an order passed by the Principal District Judge by which it rejected the review application. The court directed the State of Gujarat to recalculate and...

Mere Change In Arbitral Rules Does Not Frustrate Arbitration Agreement: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court Division Bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakru and Justice C.M. Joshi has set aside interim injunctions granted by Commercial Court by which it restrained L & T Infra Investment Partners Advisory Pvt. Ltd. (“L&T Infra”) from proceeding with arbitration under the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) Rules against Bhoruka Power...

Mere Registration Of FIR Or Pendency Of Proceedings Before DRT Does Not Bar Reference To Arbitration: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Advait M. Sethna has held that the disputes between Mangal Credit and Fincorp Limited and Ulka Chandrshekhar Nair are arbitrable under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) even though allegations of fraud and forgery were raised and a criminal was filed in which no progress has been made. The Court further held...

Claims Raised After Commencement Of Insolvency Proceedings Stand Extinguished, Not Amenable To Arbitration: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Jyoti Singh has observed that claims which are not a part of the Resolution Plan on the date of approval, shall stand extinguished and no person will be entitled to arbitrate such claims. Put differently, post-insolvency commencement date claims which are not made a part of the Resolution Plan are not arbitrable. Facts The present petition...

Section 9 As An Eviction Shortcut? Why Mumbai's Re-Development Battles Keep Coming To Court

Re-development in Mumbai is both necessary and contentious – thousands of dilapidated buildings need re-building, but the viability of each project depends on residents vacating their homes. Most residents cooperate, but a few resist re-development. When that happens, in some cases, housing societies, with the support of a the majority, nevertheless enter into development agreements with developers. The developers then often rush to the Bombay High Court under Section 9 of the Arbitration and...