Subrogation Deed Does Not Terminate The Right Of The Assured To Initiate Arbitration Against The Wrongdoer: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that arbitration can be invoked by the insured even after entering into a subrogation-cum-assignment agreement with an insurance company. The Single Bench of Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva held that subrogation does not put an end to the right of the assured to initiate legal proceedings against the wrongdoer, it merely allows the insurer to step into the shoes...

Dispute Referred To Arbitration Under MSME Act; Court Can Extend The Mandate Of Arbitrator Under Section 29A Of A&C Act: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has ruled that even in cases where the dispute has been referred to arbitration under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSME Act), the Court is empowered under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) to extend the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal. The Single Bench of Chief Justice Aravind Kumar held...

Section 8 Application Should Be Filed Within Time Available For Filing Written Statement: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that if a party fails to file an application under Section 8(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) for referring the parties to arbitration within the time available for filing the first statement on the substance of the dispute, which would include a written statement in the context of a suit, the party would forfeit its right...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 3 July To 9 July, 2022

Bombay High Court: Invocation Of Arbitration Has To Be In Clear Terms; Merely Stating Claims Would Not Suffice: Bombay High Court Case Title: M/s. D.P. Construction versus M/s. Vishvaraj Environment Pvt. Ltd. The Bombay High Court has ruled that invocation of arbitration has to be in clear terms, as specified in Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C...

"Interim Award Is A Stopover En-Route To The Destination To Final Adjudication Of The Dispute": Calcutta High Court Explains

Recently, the Calcutta High Court has discussed the concept of interim award under the Arbitration Act. The court was hearing a plea by Lindsay International seeking to set aside an order dated 24th August, 2019 by which the petitioner's pleaded that it was an interim order in terms of the Act. Single judge bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya held that the impugned decision dated...

Section 8 Of A&C Act Can't Be Invoked Based On A Non-Binding Arbitration Agreement: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has ruled that since the agreement between the parties provided for a 'non-binding' arbitration, there was absolutely no intention of the parties to enter into an arbitration agreement and that the said agreement could not be termed as an arbitration agreement. The Single Bench of Justice Sachin Shankar Magadum held that since under the relevant clause in...

Invocation Of Arbitration Has To Be In Clear Terms; Merely Stating Claims Would Not Suffice: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has ruled that invocation of arbitration has to be in clear terms, as specified in Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), and that a mere reference to the claims and disputes sought to be raised by a party, and the existence of an arbitration clause, would not itself mean that arbitration has been invoked by such a party. The...

If The Issue Of Limitation Calls For An Enquiry, The Court Should Yield To The Authority Of The Arbitral Tribunal: Meghalaya High Court

The Meghalaya High Court has ruled that in a case where the issue of whether the claim raised by a party is barred by limitation or not calls for an inquiry, the Chief Justice or his designate should allow the objection to be decided by the arbitral tribunal in accordance with law. The Single Bench of Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee held that though in an open and shut case where it...

Objection Regarding 'Excepted Matter' Would Be An After-Thought If It Was Not Raised Before The Arbitrator: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that the objection regarding the excepted matter would be an after-thought if the same was not raised before the arbitral tribunal. The Division Bench of Justice Mukta Gupta and Justice Neena Bansal Krishna relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in J.G. Engineers v. UOI (2011) 5 SCC 758 to hold that only the question of determination of...

Petition Under Section 11 Of The A&C Act Would Be Non-Maintainable After Filing Of An Application Under Section 13 Of The Act: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that a party cannot file a petition under Section 11 of the A&C Act after it has already submitted to the jurisdiction of the arbitrator by way of filing a petition under Section 11 of the A&C Act. The Single Bench of Justice Sandeep Sharma held once the petitioner has failed to respond/object to the arbitration notice wherein the name...

Stamp Duty On Arbitral Award To Be Paid As Per The Rate Applicable When The Award Was Signed : Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has ruled that the date for the purpose of quantifying the stamp duty payable on an arbitral award under the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 is the date on which the award was signed. The Single Bench of Justice S. Vishwajith Shetty held that since the amendment to Article 11(b) of the Schedule to the Karnataka Stamp Act was already in force on the date of passing...

Challenge Without Impugned Award, Vakalatnama, And The Attested Statement Of Truth, Non-Est In Law: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that an challenge petition filed without impugned award, vakalatnama, and verification is non-est in law. The Single Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru was dealing with a case where the petitioner had initially filed a challenge petition under Section 34 of the A&C Act without the impugned award, vakalatnama, and the statement of...