Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: March 19 To March 25, 2023

Bombay High Court: Not Necessary For Party To Raise Objection Regarding Unilateral Appointment Before The Arbitrator, Can Be Raised In S. 34 Petition: Bombay High Court Case Title: Hanuman Motors Pvt Ltd & Anr. vs. M/s Tata Motors Finance Ltd The Bombay High Court has ruled that when one of the parties to the dispute has an overwhelming and unilateral power to appoint a...

Not Necessary For Party To Raise Objection Regarding Unilateral Appointment Before The Arbitrator, Can Be Raised In S. 34 Petition: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has ruled that when one of the parties to the dispute has an overwhelming and unilateral power to appoint a Sole Arbitrator, the same completely vitiates such an appointment as the same is hit by Section 12(5) read with the Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act). While dealing with a petition filed under Section 34 of the...

Arbitrator Under The National Highways Act Has To Give An Award Within 1 Year, Failure Can Result In Termination Of The Mandate: HP High Court

The High Court of Himachal Pradesh has held that the arbitration proceedings under the National Highways Act, 1956 are governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, thus, the arbitrator so appointed by the Central Government under Section 3G(a) of the National Highways Act is bound to follow the provisions of the A&C Act. The bench of Justice Sushil Kukreja held that...

Party Can’t Restrict Limitation Period For Invoking Arbitration Contrary To Limitation Act : Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that, in view of Section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, a party cannot be permitted to restrict the period of limitation for invoking arbitration, in contravention to the limitation period provided by law. The Court observed that a lesser period of limitation provided under the Contract between the parties would be hit by Section 28. While dealing...

Airport Metro Arbitral Award: DMRC Seeks Review Of High Court Ruling, Says Attachment Of Statutory Expenses Will Cause Chaos On Delhi Roads

Seeking a review of Delhi High Court's recent decision on the execution petition filed by Reliance Infra-promoted Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited (DAMEPL), the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) has told the court that the attachment of its statutory expenses will result in immediate stoppage of the entire metro network in National Capital Region and cause inconvenience to more...

Facilitation Council Under MSMED Act Has No Jurisdiction To Conduct Arbitration Dispute Arising Under A Works Contract: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has set aside an arbitral award passed by the Facilitation Council by invoking statutory arbitration under Section 18(3) of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED Act), while holding that the Council could not have exercised jurisdiction to conduct arbitration in a dispute arising under a works contract. The bench of...

High Court Exercises Judicial Function Under S. 11 (6) of Arbitration Act; Principle Of Res Judicata Applicable To S. 11 Petition: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the High Court exercises a judicial function under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), and thus while dealing with a petition filed under Section 11 for appointment of Arbitrator, the High Court can determine the issue of maintainability of a petition on any ground, including on territorial jurisdiction or...

Arbitral Tribunal Erred In Fixing Fees Separately For Claims And Counter-Claims, Contrary To The Agreement Between Parties: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the Apex Court’s decision in Oil and Natural Gas (ONGC) vs Afcons Gunanusa JV (2022), where it had interpreted the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), clearly requires party autonomy to be given paramount importance. The bench of Justice Prateek Jalan remarked that though in ONGC (2022), it was held that...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: March 12 To March 18, 2023

Bombay High Court: Arbitrator’s Direction For Disclosure Of Not Relevant Information Is An Order Under S. 19 And Not 17 Of Arbitration Act: Bombay High Court Case Title: Sara Chemicals and Consultants vs. Deepak Nitrite Ltd The Bombay High Court has ruled that no appeal is maintainable under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) against the...

Section 9 Of The Arbitration Act Does Not Envisage The Restoration Of Terminated Contract: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that the scope of Section 9 of the A&C Act does not envisages relief in the nature that would restore a contract which already stands terminated. The bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held that the Court while exercising powers under Section 9 of the A&C Act cannot direct specific performance of a determinable contract. It held that a...

'Governments Can’t Shirk From Liability To Abide By Judgments, Decrees & Awards': Delhi High Court Lifts Corporate Veil In DAMEPL-DMRC Dispute

The Delhi High Court on Friday observed that the Union of India and Delhi Government are in complete control of affairs of Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) and must be commanded to take appropriate steps to enable the corporation to meet the obligation of making payment of dues to Reliance Infra-owned Delhi Airport Metro Express Private Limited (DAMEPL) under a 2017 arbitral award.Lifting...

Antrix Devas Deal: Delhi High Court Upholds Single Judge's Decision Of Setting Aside 2015 Arbitral Award, Says Fraud 'Serious And Complex'

The Delhi High Court on Friday dismissed an appeal against single judge’s order setting aside a 2015 arbitral award by which Antrix Corporation Limited, commercial and marketing arm of ISRO, was required to pay US$ 562.2 million to Devas Multimedia Private Limited over wrongful repudiation of a contract.A division bench of Chief Justice Satish and Justice Subramonium Prasad in its judgment...