Arbitration
The Evolving Jurisprudence Of Enforceability Of Interim Arbitral Awards
The 246th report of the Law Commission made certain recommendations to amend section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') with an intent to strengthen this provision which provides for statutory mechanism for the enforcement of the interim measures by arbitral tribunal on the pretext that earlier there was no comprehensive mechanism to enforce the interim measures awarded by the tribunal. These amendments sought to provide the much needed...
Arbitral Award Cannot Be Modified By Executing Court On The Basis Of Just A Memo: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has ruled that in the absence of an application filed under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) for correction of typographical errors in the arbitral award, the Court cannot pass an order modifying and correcting the arbitral award on the basis of a Memo filed before it by a party. The Single Bench of Justice E.S. Indiresh...
Order Passed By The Arbitrator Allowing Meetings As Per Convenience Of Parties, Would Not Change The Seat Of Arbitration: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has ruled that an order passed by the Arbitrator holding that the arbitral proceedings shall be conducted at any other place, would not change the seat of Arbitration as provided in the Arbitration Clause. The Single Bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao held that the Arbitrator cannot decide anything contrary to what has been decided by the parties. The petitioner...
Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 29th May To 4th June, 2022
Allahabad High Court Section 47 CPC Application Is Not Maintainable In Execution Proceedings UnderArbitration Act, 1940: Allahabad High Court Case Title: Bharat Pumps and Compressors versus Chopra Fabricators Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 269 The Allahabad High Court has held that an application under Section 47 of the CPC is not maintainable in the execution proceedings...
Award Cannot Be Remitted To The Arbitral Tribunal Under Section 34 (4) Of The A&C Act, If No Reasons and Findings Are Recorded: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that the arbitral award cannot be remitted back to the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 34 (4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) if there are no findings recorded in the arbitral award on the contentious issues. The Single Bench of Justice Ashok Kumar Gaur reiterated that discretionary powers under Section 34 (4) of the...
If MoU Arises Out Of An Agreement Containing Arbitration Clause, Reference Of MoU Is Valid: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has ruled that where an MoU has been signed by the parties for settlement of dues arising under an agreement, arbitration can be sought for violation of the terms of the MoU, even if the MoU does not contain an Arbitration Clause. The Single Bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani held that since the MoU was a part of the dispute covered by the Arbitration...
Once The Ledger Duly Reflects The Amount As Outstanding And Payable, The Period Of Limitation Would Run From The Said Date: Delhi High Court
The High Court of Delhi has held that acknowledgment of an amount as due and payable under the ledger/statement of accounts, constitutes a fresh cause of action and extends the period of limitation. The Division Bench of Justice Rajiv Shakdher and Justice Jasmeet Singh held that the period of limitation for an amount that is shown as outstanding in the book of accounts would get...
Monthly Digest Of Arbitration Cases : May 2022
Supreme Court "Group Of Companies" Doctrine Needs Relook,Says Supreme Court; Refers Issues To Larger Bench Case Title: Cox and Kings Limited versus SAP India Private Limited and Anr. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 455 The Supreme Court has referred various aspects regarding the application of the doctrine of 'Group of Companies', which is often utilised to bind non-signatories...
Embargo Under Section 12(5) Of The A&C Act Would Not Apply To A Distant Relative Of The Parties: Delhi High Court
The High Court of Delhi has held that the embargo under Section 12(5) of the A&C Act would not apply to a distant relative of the parties. The Single Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru held that in terms of Explanation 1 and Entry 9 to the Seventh Schedule r/w Section 12(5) only spouse, sibling, child, parent or life partner of a party would be ineligible to be appointed as an...
High Courts Without Original Civil Jurisdiction Require Commercial Division For International Arbitration: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has ruled that even with respect to a High Court that does not exercise an Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction, a Commercial Division is required to be established for the purpose of considering applications and appeals arising out of an International Commercial Arbitration. The Court added that the said Commercial Division must comprise of a Single...
Enforcement Of A Foreign Arbitral Award Can Be Filed In More Than One High Court: Madras High Court
The High Court of Madras has held that more than one High Court can exercise jurisdiction for the recognition and enforcement of a part of arbitral award if the claims are decided for and against the parties thereto. The Single Bench of Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy held that the Court for the purpose of the enforcement of a foreign award would be the one within...
Multiple Arbitrations With Regard To Existing Claims On Same Contract Are To Be Avoided: Delhi High Court
The High Court of Delhi has held that multiple arbitrations with regard to existing claims on same contract are to be avoided. The Single Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait held that permitting the parties to have multiple arbitrations for the adjudication of the existing disputes related to the same contract would entail multiple observations. The Court further held...