A Clause That Restricts The Right Of The Contractor To Seek Damages For Delay Attributable To The Employer Is Against Public Policy: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that a clause that restricts the right of the contractor to seek damages for delay attributable to the employer is against public policy in terms of Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act. The bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held a clause that restricts the right of the aggrieved party to claim damages is prohibitionary in nature and...

Court Under Section 34 Of The A&C Act Can Partially Set Aside The Award: Delhi High Court Reiterates

The High Court of Delhi has held that a Court exercising powers under Section 34 of the A&C Act can sever an offending portion of the arbitral award. It held that such exercise of power amounts to partial setting aside of the award and not a modification. The bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh explained that modification would be when the court modifies/changes the damages...

Annual Digest of Arbitration Cases : 2023 (Part -II)

Supreme Court Will The Mandate Of The Tribunal Terminate Under Section 29A Unless Extended During Its Subsistence? Supreme Court To Examine The Supreme Court is set to examine an important issue related to the arbitration law that whether the mandate of the tribunal terminates upon the expiry of the time provided under Section 29A unless extended during its subsistence. The bench...

Arbitral Tribunal Can Award Damages For Delay By Employer Even In Absence Of Any Clause In Agreement : Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that the Arbitral tribunal can award monetary compensation as damages for the delay attributable to employer even when the agreement provides for the extension of time as the only remedy to the contractor. The bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held that the tribunal cannot deny damages on the ground that the agreement provides only for extension...

Arbitral Tribunal Can Go Beyond To Grant Relief To Aggrieved Party When Contract Illegally Restricts Remedies : Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that an Arbitral Tribunal can transgress the boundaries of the contract to grant relief to aggrieved party when the contract illegally restricts or does not provide for sufficient remedies. The bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held that in a situation which is not anticipated in the agreement, the tribunal can transgress the boundaries...

Non-Mentioning Of Prayer Renders The Petition Under Section 34 Of The A&C Act As Invalid: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that non-mentioning of prayer renders the petition under Section 34 of the A&C Act as invalid. The bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna held that without a prayer to set aside the impugned award, a petition cannot be considered valid as such petitions would merely amount to empty submissions without a relief. The Court...

Under Section 34(3) Of The A&C Act, The Limitation Period Of 3 Months Plus 30 Days In Inelastic And Inflexible: Delhi High Court Reiterates

The High Court of Delhi has held that under Section 34(3) of the A&C Act, the limitation period of 3 months plus 30 days in inelastic and inflexible. The bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna explained that the challenge petition must be filed within 3 months from the date of the receiving of the award, however, a grace period of 30 days is given in which...

Section 34 Petition Is Non-Est If Filed Without The Arbitral Award: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that non-filing of the arbitral award along with the petition under Section 34 of the A&C Act is a fatal defect which renders the filing as non-est. The bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna held that filing of an award along with the challenge petition is not an empty procedural requirement as sans the award, the Court...

Annual Digest of Arbitration Cases 2023- Supreme Court And High Courts (Part-1)

Supreme Court Arbitration Clauses In Unstamped Agreements Enforceable : Supreme Court 7-Judge Bench Overrules 'NN Global' Decision Case Title: In Re Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements Under The Arbitration And Conciliation Act 1996 And The Indian Stamp Act 1899 Curative Pet(C) No. 44/2023 In R.P.(C) No. 704/2021 In C.A. No. 1599/2020 Citation: 2023 LiveLaw...

Claim Arising Out Of Arbitral Award Against Which Section 34 Proceedings Are Pending, NCLT Kolkata Upholds RP's Decision To Admit Claim Contingently

The National Company Law Tribunal (“NCLT”), Kolkata Bench, comprising of Shri Rohit Kapoor (Judicial Member) and Shri Balraj Joshi (Technical Member), has upheld the Resolution Professional's decision to admit claim arising out of an arbitral Award as contingent claim, since proceedings under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 are pending before the High Court...

Arbitral Awards Cannot Be Modified Under Sections 34 & 37 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act : Supreme Court

While deciding on a plea whether there is a scope of interference with arbitral awards under Section 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Supreme Court has reiterated the settled position of law that any attempt to “modify an award” while adjudicating Sections 34 and 37 petitions is not permissible under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.The Division Bench...

Arbitration Monthly Round-Up: December 2023

Supreme Court Arbitration Clauses In Unstamped Agreements Enforceable : Supreme Court 7-Judge Bench Overrules 'NN Global' Decision Case Title: In Re Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements Under The Arbitration And Conciliation Act 1996 And The Indian Stamp Act 1899 Curative Pet(C) No. 44/2023 In R.P.(C) No. 704/2021 In C.A. No. 1599/2020 Citation: 2023 LiveLaw...