No Bar On Invoking Arbitration Despite Alternative Remedy Under RERA Act: Gauhati High Court

The Gauhati High Court bench of Justice Michael Zothankhuma has held that arbitration can be invoked to settle a real estate dispute, despite the existence of an alternative legal remedy under the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act (RERA Act). The High Court held that there was there is no inherent conflict or repugnancy between the RERA Act and the Arbitration Act. It held...

High Court Not Having Original Civil Jurisdiction Cannot Extend Time To Pass Arbitral Award As Per S.29A(4) Arbitration Act : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that a High Court which does not have original civil jurisdiction does not have the power to extend the time limit for passing of the arbitral award as per Section 29A of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 (“Act”).The bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan clarified that as per the mandate of Section 29A (4) of the Act, the power to extend...

Gujrat High Court Sets Aside Order Of District Judge Which Interfered With Arbitration Award

The Gujarat High Court bench of Chief Justice Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee has held that arbitral awards providing reasoned interpretations of contractual terms are to be treated with substantial deference under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It held that reappreciation of evidence is not permissible under...

[Arbitration Act] Scope Of Inquiry In Section 9 Petition Is Limited, Interpretation Of Contract Would Be Within Domain Of Arbitral Tribunal: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna has held that under a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the scope of inquiry is very limited to grant interim relief. The bench held that issues of fact or law are not to be determined finally at the Section 9 stage as they fall within the jurisdiction of the arbitral Tribunal. It held...

Arbitration Clause Valid But Unilateral Appointment Part Is Invalid: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court bench of Justice G. Girish has held that arbitration clauses with provisions for the unilateral appointment of an arbitrator cannot be entirely rejected due to this defect. It held that the clauses are to be considered valid arbitration clauses except for those portions which confer the authority upon one party to unilaterally...

Clause Of 'Amicable Resolution' Cannot Prevent Invocation Of Arbitration After Sincere Efforts At Settlement: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has held that the clause of 'amicable resolution' in the arbitration agreement cannot be read as preventing the parties from invoking the arbitration if the parties have sincerely tried to resolve the disputes amicably. It held that literal compliance with such provisions may...

Section 31 Of Arbitration Act, 1940 Does Not Bar Court From Entertaining Applications Pre-Filing Of Award: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Vishal Dhagat has held that there is no bar created by Section 31 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 that the court cannot entertain an application in respect of award until it has been filed. Section 31 of the Arbitration Act, of 1940, specifies the court jurisdiction for arbitration matters. It states that an award may be filed in any...

High Court Lacks Jurisdiction To Entertain Applications Under Section 29A For Extension Of Arbitrator's Mandate: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court bench of has held the High Court, not being a Court within the meaning of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, has no jurisdiction to entertain an application under Section 29A. Section 29A(4) of the Arbitration Act states that if the award is not made within the period specified of six months or the extended period of parties' mutual consent, any...

Settlement Of Dispute By Expert Is Not Arbitration, No Intention To Submit To Independent Arbitrator: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar held that a clause laying down the settlement of the dispute by an expert cannot be said to be an arbitration clause. The bench held that an arbitral tribunal arrives at its decision on the evidence and submissions of the parties and must apply the law. It held that an expert, unless it is agreed otherwise, makes his own...

Arbitration Clause Valid Despite Even Number Of Arbitrators: Delhi High Court Allows Section 11(6) Petition

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that the arbitration clause is not invalidated merely on the ground that the number of arbitrators, as per the arbitration clause, was an even number and therefore, was in contravention of Section 10 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Section 10 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 states that the...

[Arbitration Act] Mere Sending of Notice Under Section 21 Not Enough, Receipt of Notice Essential: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has held that merely sending notice of arbitration under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is not sufficient. It held that receipt of the notice is the prerequisite for the commencement of arbitration proceedings. Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: "21. Commencement...

Arbitration Requires Dispute Arising From Agreement, Unrelated Disputes Ineligible for Arbitration: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court bench of Justice Rekha Borana held that arbitration hinges on the presence of a dispute arising from the agreement between the involved parties. The bench held that any dispute unrelated to the terms of the agreement between the parties cannot be subject to the arbitration clause and therefore cannot be referred to arbitration under the...