Rewriting Commercial Contractual Terms Is Fatal To An Arbitral Award: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that where the parties agree to enter into a mutual consultation in the future, for making amendments to an original agreement, the same would only constitute an "agreement to agree", which is not enforceable in law. The Court held that the finding of the arbitral tribunal that though the amendment contemplated by the "Amendment to the Share...

Arbitration Clause In The Initial Agreement Binding Even If Subsequent Settlement Doesn't Have It: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that an arbitration clause contained in a rent agreement would continue to be binding upon the parties, despite the fact that after the expiry of the agreement the parties had entered into a 'Terms of Settlement' and 'Addendum to Settlement', which did not contain an arbitration clause. The Court observed that the relationship between the parties came...

Initiation Of Proceedings Under The SARFAESI Act Does Not Bar The Arbitration Of Disputes: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) provides a remedy in addition to the adjudication under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act)and hence, initiation of proceedings under the SARFAESI Act does not bar the arbitration...

Arbitral Tribunal Cannot Recall The Order Terminating The Arbitral Proceedings: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that once the arbitral tribunal terminates the arbitration proceedings on account of claimant withdrawing its claims, it cannot recall the order of termination order. The bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar held that once the arbitral proceedings are terminated, the arbitral tribunal becomes Functus Officio and it cannot entertain an application...

Notice Stating Right To Initiate Arbitration Not A Notice Under Section 21 of A&C Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a notice issued by a party, merely stating its right to initiate arbitral proceedings, which it would subsequently initiate if the payment was not made by the opposite party, is a unilateral communication which does not qualify as a notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act). The Division Bench of Justices...

Close Relative Of Arbitrator Must Be 'Controlling The Company' To Make Him Ineligible: Orissa High Court

The Orissa High Court has clarified that to make an arbitrator ineligible under Clause 9 of the Seventh Schedule read with Section 12(5), the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the arbitrator must have a close family relationship with a party and in case of companies, he must have a close relation with the person(s) in the management who should be...

Limitation Qua Counter-Claim Stops On The Date Of Notice Of Arbitration: Madras High Court

The High Court of Madras has held that the limitation period qua Counter-Claims would be arrested on the date on which the respondent issues the notice of arbitration and the date of filing of counter-claims would be irrelevant. The bench of Justice M. Sundar further held that limitation is a facet of 'public policy' and an error in limitation clearly leaves an award hit...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 9 October To 15 October, 2022

Delhi High Court: Period Of Limitation For Referring The Dispute To Arbitration Commences Only After The Failure Of Pre-Arbitration Mechanism: Delhi High Court Case Title: Welspun Enterprises Ltd. versus NCC Ltd. The High Court of Delhi has held that the period of limitation for referring the dispute to arbitration would only commence after the internal dispute resolution...

Place Of Arbitration Would Not Become The 'Seat' When The Exclusive Jurisdiction Is Conferred On A Court At A Different Place: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi held that place of arbitration would not become the seat of arbitration when the parties have conferred exclusive jurisdiction on a Court other than the seat Court. The bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that conferring exclusive jurisdiction, over a Court different from the Court at the place of arbitration, would be a contrary indicia and the place...

Period Of Limitation For Referring The Dispute To Arbitration Commences Only After The Failure Of Pre-Arbitration Mechanism: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that the period of limitation for referring the dispute to arbitration would only commence after the internal dispute resolution mechanism fails. The bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Amit Mahajan held that if the agreement between the parties provides for a pre-arbitration dispute resolution mechanism, a party cannot be expected to invoke...

Whether A Claim Is A 'Notified Claim' Under The Contract, Falls Outside The Scope Of Arbitration: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the dispute whether a claim raised by a party is a 'Notified Claim' under the Contract, which can be referred to arbitration as per the arbitration clause, falls outside the scope of arbitration. The Single Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru observed that as per the arbitration clause contained in the General Conditions of Contract (GCC),...

Execution Of Arbitral Award Is To Be Filed In The Seat Court And Not At The Place Of Land Acquired: Punjab And Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that execution of an arbitral award passed under the NHAI Act is to be filed at the Seat Court and not where the acquired land is situated. The bench of Justice Raj Mohan Singh held that once the seat of arbitral proceeding is fixed then only the court within whose jurisdiction the seat is situated would have the jurisdiction to decide all...