Use Of The Word 'Can' In An Arbitration Clause Does Not Render It Ineffective, Intention To Be Looked Into: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that mere use of the word 'can' in an arbitration clause does not render it ineffective and the intention of the parties to go for arbitration is to be determined on a complete reading of the clause and relevant clauses. The Bench of Justice Prateek Jalan reiterated that exclusive jurisdiction clause would override a venue clause, therefore, the court...

"Confirming Party" To A Contract, Who Is Not Signatory To The Arbitration Clause, Can Invoke Arbitration: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a confirming party to a Contract, who is not bound by the terms of the Contract and on whom no liability is affixed under the Contract, can be referred to arbitration even if he is not a signatory to the arbitration clause contained in the Contract. The Single Bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that the fact that the party had signed...

Delhi High Court Delineates Circumstances To Invoke "Group Of Companies" Doctrine

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the plea that signatures to the MoU containing an arbitration clause were obtained by threat and coercion, cannot be considered while considering an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) for appointment of the Arbitrator. The Single Bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna held that each Company is...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 2 October To 8 October, 2022

Supreme Court: Arbitral Tribunal Must Give Reasons For Fixing Interest Rate; Award Holder Not Entitled To Interest For Delay Caused By It : Supreme Court Case Title: Executive Engineer (R and B) versus Gokul Chandra Kanungo The Supreme Court recently held that a case where the award holder was responsible for delaying the proceedings which led to a huge lapse of time would be a...

Members Of Joint Venture Cannot Invoke Arbitration Clause In Their Individual Capacity: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that where an agreement is entered into by the parties by forming a consortium / Joint Venture, one of the members of the consortium cannot separately invoke the arbitration agreement in their individual capacity. The Single Bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna reiterated that when there is an agreement with a consortium, it is never the intention of...

Arbitral Award Directing Specific Performance Of Contract, Cannot Be Set Aside On Ground Of Inequitable Nature Of Contract: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has ruled that an arbitral award directing specific performance of a contract, cannot be set aside on the ground that the nature of agreement between the parties was not capable of specific enforcement. The Court added that the said issue related to the construction of an agreement, which cannot be made a ground for interference of the arbitral award under Section 34...

Arbitral Tribunal Must Give Reasons For Fixing Interest Rate; Award Holder Not Entitled To Interest For Delay Caused By It : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently held that a case where the award holder was responsible for delaying the proceedings which led to a huge lapse of time would be a fit case of exercising power under Article 142 to reduce the rate of interest on the sum of award. The Court further held the Arbitration and Conciliation Act casts a duty upon the arbitral tribunal to give reasons as to how it...

Arbitration - Court Can Undertake Preliminary Inquiry Under Section 11 To Ascertain If Dispute Is Arbitrable : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that the High Courts while appointing the arbitrator can launch a preliminary inquiry to decide the issue of 'Excepted Matters' when an objection to that effect is taken by the respondent. The bench of Justices M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari held that if any dispute falls within the 'excepted' category provided in the contract between the parties, then it...

Limitation Period For Invoking Arbitration Cannot Be Extended By Consent: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a statement made by the opposite party in the reply to the notice invoking the arbitration clause, giving consent for appointment of an arbitrator, would not extend the limitation period for invoking arbitration, if the claims raised by the claimant are ex-facie time-barred. The Single Bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani held that...

Review Of Judgment/Order Passed Under Section 11 Of The A&C Act Is Not Permissible: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that review of an order/judgment passed under Section 11 of the A&C Act is not permissible. The Bench of Justice R. Raghunandan Rao held that power of review is the creature of a statute and in absence of any such provision in a statute, an order/judgment cannot be reviewed on its merit unless it is for some procedural irregularity....

Dispute of Unregistered Partnership Firm Can Be Referred To Arbitration, Bar U/S 69 Partnership Act Not Applicable: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court on Friday, while hearing an application filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Arbitration Act') for appointment of an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties, held that the bars for instituting a suit or any other proceeding under Section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act, 1932 ('Partnership Act') shall not...

Arbitrator Cannot Delegate The Task Of Quantifying The Amount Of Award To A Chartered Accountant: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has held that the arbitrator can indeed take assistance from a third party, including a Chartered Accountant, however, it cannot completely delegate the important function of quantifying the amount of award to any third party. The Bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf held that an arbitral award wherein the arbitrator failed to determine the amount of award...