Application Under Section 9 Of The A&C Act For Pre-Award Relief Can Be Filed In A Court Where The Assets Of The Respondent Are Located: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that an application under Section 9 of the A&C Act for pre-award relief can also be filed before the Court where the assets of the respondent are located. The Bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula held that the Court for the purpose of Section 9 application in a foreign seated arbitration would be as provided under Section 47 of the...

CPC Contemplates Execution Of A Foreign Decree And Not An Order: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that remedy before the foreign arbitral tribunal would not be inefficacious when the bulk of the assets of a party are located in India as the interim order in a foreign-seated arbitration is not enforceable under the A&C Act. The Bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula also held that an interim award passed in arbitration with seat in India is...

Once The Right To Refer The Dispute To Arbitration Is Waived By A Party, It Cannot Be Reclaimed: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has ruled that if a party has disputed the arbitrability of a dispute raised by the opposite party, in its reply to the notice invoking the arbitration clause, it is deemed to have waived its right to seek the reference of the dispute to arbitration. The Court added that if a right is once waived by a party, it cannot be allowed to be reclaimed and hence, the...

The Rejection Of An Application Under Section 34 Of The A&C Act Cannot Be Construed To Mean That The Court Has Concurred With The View Of The Arbitral Tribunal: Delhi High Court

The Rejection Of An Application Under Section 34 Of The A&C Act Cannot Be Construed To Mean That The Court Has Concurred With The View Of The Arbitral Tribunal: Delhi High CourtThe High Court of Delhi has held that merely because the challenge to an arbitral award is dismissed by the Court exercising powers under Section 34 of the A&C Act would not mean that the court has...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 10th July To 16th July, 2022

Supreme Court: Court Under Section 34,37 Arbitration Act Cannot Modify An Award ; It Can Only Remand: Supreme Court Case Title: National Highways Authority of India versus P. Nagaraju @ Cheluvaiah Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 584 The Supreme Court observed that, under Section 34 or 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, a Court cannot modify the award passed by the...

Impossible For The Party To Fulfil Its Obligations Under The Contract; Parties Cannot Be Referred To Arbitration: Telangana High Court

The Telangana High Court has ruled since it was impossible for a party to fulfil its obligations under an agreement, in view of the doctrine of frustration, the parties cannot be referred to arbitration, despite the presence of an arbitration clause. The Single Bench of Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan observed that though the lease deed between the parties contained an arbitration...

Amendment To Section 34 Application Of The A&C Act Would Not Be Permissible If It Intends A New Challenge: Bombay High Court

The Aurangabad Bench of Bombay High Court has held that an amendment to the application under Section 34 of the A&C Act would not be allowed if it leads to absolutely new grounds to challenge the award. The Single Bench of Justice Mangesh S. Patil held that in an appropriate case it is permissible to allow the amendment to application under Section 34 even beyond the period...

Prima Facie Case Alone Does Not Entitle A Party To Relief Under Section 17 Of The A&C Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a prima facie case alone does not entitle a party to relief under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) for interim measures. The Single Bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula observed that there were highly disputed questions of fact involved in the dispute relating to the interpretation of the agreement between the...

Even If The Principal Agreement Is Non-Existent, The Arbitration Clause Would Still Apply: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that even if the principal agreement is non-existent, the arbitration clause contained therein would still apply. The Single Bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao observed that since the issue of limitation and arbitrability was not conclusive against the party, the issue was amenable to the jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal. The petitioner...

Court Under Section 34,37 Arbitration Act Cannot Modify An Award ; It Can Only Remand : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that, under Section 34 or 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, a Court cannot modify the award passed by the Arbitrator.The option would be to set aside the award and remand the matter, the bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and AS Bopanna said.The court was considering the appeals filed by National Highways Authority of India ('NHAI') assailing the...

Counter-Claim Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because The Claims Thereunder Were Not Notified At The Pre-Arbitral Stage: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that the counter-claim of a party cannot be dismissed merely because the claims were not notified before invoking the arbitration. The Division Bench of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice Sanjiv Khanna held that there is a difference between the word "Claim" and "Dispute" where the former may be a one-sided thing while the latter by its definition has two sides....

The Arbitration Clause Contained In A Manual Issued By The Government As A Generic Guideline Is Not Binding: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court Bench of Chief Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra has held that arbitration clause contained in a government manual as generic guidelines cannot be invoked by the parties. The Court also observed that there cannot be an arbitration clause in a sub-contract or in a separate document when there is no binding agreement between the parties in the first...