Settlement Process By Chairman And Managing Director Doesn't Involve Adjudication, Not Final And Binding: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court division bench of Justice I.P. Mukerji and Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury held that the settlement process undertaken by the Chairman and Managing Director of the company doesn't involve adjudication. It held that the termination of a settlement attempt does not always result in a “final and binding” decision. Relevant Clause of the...

MSME Act | Council Cannot Entertain Application For Maintainability Of Reference At Conciliation Stage: Orissa High Court

The Orissa High Court single bench of Justice KR Mohapatra held that Micro & Small Enterprises Facilitation Council doesn't have power to entertain an application with regard to the maintainability of the reference at the conciliation stage under Micro, Small And Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006. It held that question of maintainability can only be adjudicated if arbitration...

Sub-lease Agreement Excluded Disputes Related To Public Premise From Arbitration, Making Them Non-Arbitrable: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held that arbitral tribunal should generally be the primary authority to determine non-arbitrability, except in cases where claims were manifestly and ex facie non-arbitrable. It held that Sub-lease Agreement excluded the disputes related to public premise from arbitration, therefore, making them...

Once Party Submits Itself To Jurisdiction Of Court And Abandons Section 8 Application, Cannot Seek Reference u/s 8: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that held that once a defendant submits itself to the jurisdiction of the Court and abandons its application under Section 8, it cannot subsequently seek referral of the disputes to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts: The Defendant No.1 field an application in Delhi High Court...

Tax Invoices Stating Arbitration Clause Binds Parties To Arbitration: Delhi High Court Refers Parties To Arbitration

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Prathibha M. Singh held that the tax invoices explicitly containing the arbitration clause and parties without raising any dispute concerning it are legally bound by the arbitration clause. “In the present case, the parties have a running account which is not in dispute. Two purchase orders may have been placed by the Respondent and...

Section 3 A&C | Deemed Service Is Rebuttable, If Party Establishes Delivery Could Not Be Made Despite Fulfilling Conditions u/s 3: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri held that the delivery of a signed copy of the arbitral award to a party isn't merely procedural but confers a substantive right upon them to challenge the award within the statutory period. The bench held that the presumption of deemed service under Section 3 of the Arbitration Act is rebuttable and can be negated if a...

One Party Cannot Appoint 2/3rd Of The Arbitral Tribunal: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that a panel for appointment of arbitrator cannot be restricted to mere 3 names as it would violate broad-based representation. Moreover, one party cannot appoint 2/3rd members of the arbitral tribunal as it would violate principles of neutrality and counter-balancing. The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma also held that a petition under...

Unless Clear Contrary Intention, Venue In Arbitration Clause Should Be Seat Of Arbitral Proceedings: Delhi High Court Rejects Section 11 Petition

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani held that if there are no clear indications to the contrary, the venue specified in an arbitration clause should be considered as the seat of arbitral proceedings. It underscored importance of discerning the intention of the parties by examining the entirety of the contract's terms. Brief Facts: The Petitioner...

Whether Claims Of Party Are Barred By Limitation, Need To Be Decided By Arbitrator Under Section 16 A&C: Telangana High Court

The Telangana High Court single bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe held that the question of whether the claims of a party are barred by limitation is a matter that necessitates adjudication by the Arbitral Tribunal. Considering the provisions outlined in Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and the legislative intent to curtail judicial interference at the pre-reference...

Waiver Under Section 12(5) A&C Not Inferred From Conduct Of Party, Even If It Participates In Arbitration: Delhi High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Prateek Jalan dismissed the contention that a party can waive its right to object to the arbitrator's appointment through its conduct. It underscored that any waiver under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act must be explicit and in writing. It noted that there is no room for implying a waiver of rights under Section 12(5)...

General Reference Won't Have Effect Of Incorporating Arbitration Clause In Another Contract, Specific Reference Needed : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court reiterated that a dispute cannot be referred to arbitration based on the arbitration clause contained in another contract unless a specific reference was made in the main contract to incorporate the arbitration clause into the main contract. Reversing the findings of the High Court, the Bench Comprising Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta held that unless a specific...

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: 11th March to 17th March 2024

Prima Facie No Arbitration Agreement Between Parties, Delhi High Court Dismisses Section 11(5) A&C PetitionCase Title: Aerosource India Pvt Ltd. Vs Geetanjali Aviation Pvt Ltd. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 296 The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma dismissed a petition filed under Section 11 (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, noting...