Arbitration
Objection To Tribunal's Jurisdiction U/S 16 Of Arbitration Act Must Be Raised Before Or At Time Of Statement Of Defence: Himachal Pradesh HC
The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua affirmed that a party is bound by virtue of Section 16(2) of the Arbitration Act to raise any objection it may have to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal before or at the time of submission of its statement of defence, and at any time thereafter it is expressly prohibited. Brief Facts Objections preferred by...
S. 29A Of Arbitration Act Not Applicable To Arbitration Proceedings Which Commenced Before 2015 Amendment: Himachal Pradesh HC
The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua affirmed that provisions of Section 29A of the Act will not be applicable to the arbitration proceedings that had started before the Arbitration & Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 came into force.Brief Facts The National Highway Authority of India (for short 'NHAI') feeling aggrieved against the dismissal of...
Arbitrator Nominated U/S 18(3) MSMED Act Erred In Deciding Merits After Finding Respondent Was Not MSME: Madras HC Upholds Setting Aside Of Award
The Madras High Coury bench of Justices R. Suresh Kumar and C. Saravanan has held that an Arbitrator ought not to decide the case on merits after coming to a conclusion that the respondent was not a Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprise (MSME) and therefore not entitled to invoke the machinery under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development (MSMED) Act, 2006. The court...
Challenge To Award U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Without Award Itself Being Filed Would Not Be A Valid Filing: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad, held that a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act is for challenging the Award. It cannot be said that a challenge to the Award without the award itself being filed would be a valid filing. Without the Award, the challenge would become meaningless because unless the Award is perused by the Court,...
Requirement Of Serving Notice On Other Party For Appointment Of Arbitrator Is Dispensed With In Statutory Arbitration: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court Bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi held that the arbitration proceedings under consideration is not a commercial arbitration, but a statutory arbitration. The Arbitrator is appointed pursuant to the provisions of Section 84(5) of the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act. The appointment of the Arbitrator is made by the State...
Award In Which Serious Allegations Of Fraud Are Not Decided Must Be Set Aside On Grounds Of Patent Illegality: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court Bench of Chief Justice SUNITA AGARWAL and Justice PRANAV TRIVEDI affirmed that if serious allegations of fraud are raised that the arbitration agreement was entered into by fraud and collusion and such allegations are not decided by the Arbitrator while passing an award, such an award is liable to set aside on the ground of patent illegality under section 34 of...
Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: 28th October 2024 To 3rd November, 2024
NOMINAL INDEX 1. Atul Pratap Singh v. Indian Oil Corporation Limited and 3 Others, 2024:AHC:167917-DB 2. State Of Uttar Pradesh and 2 others v. M/S Virat Construction, 2024:AHC:171241-DB 3. NARESH KUMAR BAJAJ v. BUNGE INDIA PVT. LTD., 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 1182 4. The State of H.P. & Anr. V. M/s Garg Sons Estate Promoters Pvt. Ltd, OMP(M) No. 74 of 2023 5....
Court U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Only Checks For Existence Of Agreement, Jurisdictional Questions To Be Decided By Arbitrator: Telangana HC
The Telangana High Court Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe affirmed that Sub-section (1) of Section 16 provides that the Arbitral Tribunal may rule on its own jurisdiction, “including any objections” with respect to the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement. Section 16 is an inclusive provision, which would comprehend all preliminary issues touching upon the...
Parties To Lis Should Not Be Appointed As Receiver Without Consent Of Other Parties: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe And Justice J.Sreenivas Rao held that impartiality is an essential attribute of a Receiver. Therefore, normally one of the parties to a lis should not be appointed as Receiver without consent of the other parties unless a very special case is made out. Brief Facts This appeal under Section 37(1)(b) of the Arbitration...
Government Entity Can't Be Given Differential Treatment While Staying Operation Of Arbitral Award : Supreme Court
Recently, the Supreme Court disapproved of a High Court's decision to exempt a government entity from depositing other amounts in addition to the arbitral award amount as a condition precedent for seeking a stay on the enforcement of the award just because the government entity was not a flight risk.The bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud,Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra...
Composite Reference May Be Made When Two Contracts Are So Intertwined That Separate Arbitral Proceedings Would Prejudice Parties: Calcutta HC
The Calcutta High Court Bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharya affirmed that when two or more contracts are so intertwined with each other so as to prejudice the parties should separate arbitrations be held, a composite reference of both the contracts can be made to the Arbitrator. Brief Facts The present application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation...
Understanding Arbitration And Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015: Whether Retrospective Or Prospective In Nature
The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 marks a watershed moment in the history of Arbitration in India. The idea of the Amendment germinated in a Law Commission Report submitted in 2014 which recommended an overhaul of the current framework of the Arbitration.[1] The Amendment aimed to reduce judicial interference and ensure the timely resolution of the Arbitration matters by amending sections 9, 11, 17, 34 and 36 of the Act. However, the amendment brought in uncertainty...











