Order Rejecting Application For Impleading Third Party Is Not An Interim Arbitration Award: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that an order of the tribunal rejecting the application for impleading a party to arbitration is not an interim award but merely a procedural order, therefore, the same cannot be challenged under Section 34 of the Act. The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma held that an arbitral tribunal, during the continuance of arbitral proceedings, passes many orders...

Dispute Between Parties Under A "Non-Binding Term Sheet" Can Be Referred To Arbitration: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the dispute between the parties under an agreement titled as a "Non-Binding Term Sheet", can be referred to arbitration, holding that the Arbitration Clause contained in the said agreement was binding between the parties. The bench of Justice Navin Chawla observed that though the nomenclature of the agreement was "Non-Binding Term Sheet",...

Moratorium Under Companies Act, 2013, Parties Cannot Be Referred To Arbitration: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the moratorium granted by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), staying the institution of suits and proceedings against the Corporate Debtor, after the resolution process is initiated against it under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013, is akin to an order of moratorium passed under Section 14 of the Insolvency and...

Section 9 Application, Against Cashing Unconditional BG; Court To Consider Only Terms Of BG: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has ruled that while dealing with an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), seeking to restrain the invocation or encashment of the Bank Guarantee, the Court is only required to consider the terms of the Bank Guarantee Agreement and not the conditions contained in the main Contract between the parties, in terms...

Arbitral Tribunals Exercising Power U/S 17 Not Strictly Bound By CPC: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that the arbitral tribunals while exercising powers under Section 17 of the A&C Act are not strictly bound by the technicalities of CPC. The Court held that the ambit of power given to the tribunals for grant of interim relief is to be guided by the basic principles of CPC, however, the strict technicalities cannot prevent the tribunal from securing...

Criminal Proceedings Cannot Be Initiated For Recovery Of Amount Due Under The Arbitration Award: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that criminal proceedings cannot be initiated for recovery of amount due under an arbitration award. The bench of Justice Tirthankar Ghosh held that a party aggrieved by non-payment of amount due under a post award settlement agreement should not resort to filing a criminal case by giving a civil dispute criminal colour as the same is an abuse of...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 11 December To 17 December, 2022

Bombay High Court: Application Of Hudson's Formula For Computation Of Loss In Construction Contract, Not Unreasonable: Bombay High Court Case Title: The State of Maharashtra & Ors. versus Bharat Constructions The Bombay High Court has ruled that while deciding the petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), the Court is not...

Arbitration Clause Is Limited To Quantum Of Damages, Termination Of Proceedings Is Valid : Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that when the scope of arbitration clause is limited to quantum of damages only in the eventuality that the liability to pay is admitted by the insurance company, there can be no arbitration if the liability is denied.The bench of Justice V. Kameshwar Rao held that the suggestions given by the Surveyor in its report, though of substantial evidentiary value,...

Court Empowered To Grant Money Claim Under Section 9 Of A&C Act On Basis Of Admitted Claim: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has reiterated that the power of the Court under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) to grant interim measures of protection, is wider than the power under the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC). It ruled that procedural provisions enumerated in the CPC cannot be invoked to defeat the grant of interim relief,...

Invoking CIRP Would Not Make The Dispute Non-Arbitrable : Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that the dispute would not become non-arbitrable merely because the petitioner, before filing the application for appointment of arbitrator, has filed a corporate insolvency application under Section 9 of the IBC. The Court rejected the argument that since the petitioner has filed insolvency application which can only be filed for admitted debt and...

MOU Terminating The Main Agreement Containing The Arbitration Clause Can Be Referred To Arbitration: Delhi High Court

The High Court of has held that a dispute arising out of an Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) or Memorandum of Settlement (MoS), wherein no arbitration clause is present, can be referred to arbitration if these agreements were directly linked to the main agreement. The bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna held that dispute arising out of any subsequent agreement that arises out of the...

Can Recall Section 11 A&C Act Order, If It Suffers From Patent And Manifest Error: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the power exercised by the High Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) is not merely an administrative function but a judicial power, and that the Court does not cease to be a Court of Record while exercising power under Section 11. Thus, the bench of Justice Yashwant Varma held that the High Court...