Arbitration
Clause Giving Only Supervisory Powers To Third Party With Respect To Disputes; Not An Arbitration Agreement: Madras High court
The Madras High Court has ruled that where the parties have agreed to give only supervisory powers to a third party with respect to the disputes arising between them, and a clause which does not disclose the intention of the parties to give any adjudicatory powers to the third party, does not qualify as an 'arbitration agreement', as defined under Section 2(1)(b) read with Section 7 of...
Disputes Related To Tax Concessions Are Not Arbitrable: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has held that disputes related to tax concessions are not arbitrable. The division bench of Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Justice Hima Kohli has observed that the High Court was in error in holding that the terms of e-auction provided that any dispute was arbitrable. Undoubtedly, a contractual dispute would be amenable to being resolved by arbitration. However,...
Unilateral Determination Of Fees By Arbitrators Not Binding On Parties
The Supreme Court in 2009 in Union of India v. Singh Builders[1] recognized the problem of retired judges charging high fees as arbitrators and dragging matters for far too long resulting in the defeat of the purpose of arbitration. Against this backdrop, on the recommendations of the 246th Law Commission, the 2015 amendment of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Arbitration Act") introduced the IV Schedule to serve as a guide for the fees of arbitrators. However, a new problem...
Arbitration Clause, Effect Of Novation; Can't Be Decided Under Section 11 Of A&C Act: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has ruled that the issue whether an agreement containing an arbitration clause stood novated with the execution of a second agreement and thus, the arbitration agreement between the parties was not subsisting, cannot be decided at the stage of reference to arbitration under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), since it...
Appointment Of An Arbitrator From A Narrow Panel
The 'Rule Against Bias' is a widely accepted principle of Natural Justice. When applied in the field of arbitration, this rule command that the arbitrator must be impartial, independent, and neutral. This rule comes into play if it is shown that the person concerned to be appointed as an arbitrator has a personal connection or personal interest or has personally acted in the matter concerned. This rule of disqualification is applied not only to avoid the possibility of a partial decision...
Court Exercising Power U/Sec 9 Arbitration Act Not Strictly Bound By CPC ; Should Not Withhold Interim Relief On Mere Technicality: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court observed that a court exercising power under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is not strictly bound by provisions of CPC and should not withhold relief on the mere technicality.Proof of actual attempts to deal with, remove or dispose of the property with a view to defeat or delay the realisation of an impending Arbitral Award is not imperative for grant...
Arbitrator Can Award Interest On Interest Under The A&C Act: Orrisa High Court
The Orissa High Court has held that the arbitrator can award separate interest on claims which are in nature of interest for delayed payment. The Bench of Justice Arindam Sinha held that bar under Section 3 of the Interest Act, 1978 does not apply interest under the A&C Act. It held that under Section 31(7)(a) of the A&C Act there is no bar on the grant of interest...
Would Subsequent Agreement Cover Past Transactions ? Arbitrator To Decide: Delhi High Court
The High Court of Delhi has held that while exercising jurisdiction under Section 11 of the A&C Act, the High Court cannot examine an issue as to whether the arbitration clause in a subsequent agreement would govern past transactions of similar nature as it requires detailed consideration of clauses and surrounding circumstances. The Bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao held that...
Rejection Of Belated Application For Amendment Of Claim - Not An Interim Award: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has ruled that the order of the Arbitral Tribunal rejecting the application for amendment of statement of claims on the ground that it was filed at a belated stage, does not constitute an interim award and thus, it is not challengeable under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act). While observing the distinction between the rejection...
Participation In Arbitral Proceedings Without Protest, In Absence Of Agreement On Seat; Venue Is Also The Seat Of Arbitration: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has ruled that where the parties have failed to specifically mention the seat of arbitration and have participated in the arbitral proceedings at a place without any protest, the parties shall be said to have determined, by their conduct, the said venue of arbitral proceedings as also the seat of arbitration. Hence, the courts at the said place would...
Arbitration Clause In An Unregistered But Compulsorily Registrable Document Can Be Enforced: Uttarakhand High Court Reiterates
The Uttarakhand High Court recently observed that an arbitration agreement does not require registration under the Registration Act. Relying on the Supreme Court's findings in SMS Tea Estates Private Limited v. Chandmari Tea Company Private Limited, (2011) 14 SCC 66, a bench comprising Chief Justice Vipin Sanghi reiterated: "Even if it is found as one of the clauses in a contract...
Substitution Of Arbitrator Based On Allegation Of Collusion Can't Be Done Under Section 11 of A& C Act: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court has ruled that in an application filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), the Court cannot, on the ground of collusion, refuse to appoint the arbitrator as specified in the arbitration clause and appoint a substitute arbitrator. The Single Bench of Justice K. Lakshman held that the allegations regarding any...