Arbitration
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...
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...