Arbitration
Casual Absence Of Govt Officials Not “Sufficient Cause” To Condone Delay In Challenging Arbitral Award: HP High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has dismissed an application filed by the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board seeking condonation of delay in filing objections against an arbitral award passed in favour of HCL Infotech Ltd., holding that bureaucratic delays and internal movement of files do not constitute sufficient cause for delay.Rejecting the State's contention, the Court remarked...
Balco Disinvestment: Delhi High Court Upholds Arbitral Award Voiding Centre & Vedanta Shareholder's Pact
After over a decade of legal tussle, the Delhi High Court recently upheld an arbitral award declaring the Shareholders' Agreement (SHA) between Vedanta Limited (then Sterlite Industries) and the Union of India void, which had given Vedanta the exclusive right to buy the government's remaining 49% stake in Bharat Aluminium Company Limited (BALCO) after a three-year lock-in period. The...
Petition U/S 34 A&C Act Filed With Deficit Court Fee Is Non-Est Unless Paid Within Limitation Period: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court held that filing of a petition with deficit court fee does not amount to proper presentation. If the entire court fee is not deposited within the limitation period under section 34(3) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), the court is divested of its power to condone the delay. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh held that "filing of a petition...
Test Of Prejudice Irrelevant When Tribunal Is Constituted Without Consent Of JV Partner: Madras High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award
The Madras High Court set aside an arbitral award passed against M/s Nilakantan & Brothers Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (“the petitioner”) on the ground that since the arbitral tribunal was constituted without obtaining the consent of a Joint Venture Partner, it lacked jurisdiction. The court further held that the appointment cannot be validated merely on the ground that no...
Appeal Against Order U/S 39(2) Arbitration Act Is Not Maintainable U/S 13 Commercial Courts Act: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court dismissed an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), holding that no appeal under section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act lies against an order passed under section 39(2) of the Act. The court further held that the appeal under section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act is maintainable against those orders...
Award Passed After Expiry Of Arbitrator's Mandate Is Non-Est, Court Can't Extend Mandate Post-Award: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court held that an award passed after expiry of the arbitrator's mandate is non-est and unforceable holding that the court has no power to extend the mandate post award if no application seeking extension of the mandate was pending before the award was passed. A Division bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Vinod Kumar held that the award becomes operational...
Order Terminating Arbitration For Non-Filing Of Statement Of Claim Is Not 'Award', Cannot Be Challenged U/S 34 A&C Act: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court held that an order terminating arbitral proceedings under section 25 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) on account of non-filing of statement of claim does not amount to an arbitral award and therefore cannot be challenged under section 34. Justice Jasmeet Singh held that “the Award can only be considered to be an award once...
Principles Of Natural Justice Are Non-Negotiable In Arbitral Proceedings Even If Tribunal Is Comprised Of Lay Persons: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court, while setting aside an arbitral award, has observed that despite the arbitral Tribunal comprising elder family members, who are lay persons and not well-trained legal minds, the principles of natural justice have to be followed. If an award is passed without giving an opportunity to either of the sides to present their case, the same would violate...
Bombay High Court Sets Aside ₹75 Lakh Compensation Awarded Against Hersheys India In Jumpin Drink Manufacturing Dispute
The Bombay High Court has recently set aside a Rs 75 lakh compensation awarded to Kanti Beverages Pvt. Ltd. against Hersheys India Pvt. Ltd. in a dispute over the contract to manufacture and package the fruit drink brand Jumpin. The court said the compensation was “picked virtually out of the hat” and had no basis.A single bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan, in an order made available...
Deliberate Non-Participation In Arbitral Proceedings Not Grounds To Resist Enforcement Of Award: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court bench of Justice N Anand Venkatesh has observed that when a party purposely fails to avail an opportunity duly accorded by the Arbitral Tribunal to present its case, it cannot later use its own default as a ground to resist enforcement of the resultant award. Facts The Petitioner, M/s Vittera BV (“Vittera”) filed the present petition seeking enforcement...
Arbitrators Cannot Be Disqualified For Merely Participating In Prior Arbitration Involving Interpretation Of Similar Clause: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) filed by Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL) against an arbitral award passed in favor of British Marine PLC.(Respondent). SAIL entered into Contract of Affreightment (COA) with the respondent for transportation of 3 million metric tonnes (±5%) of coking coal over five...