Arbitration
Objections U/S 47 CPC Can't Be Entertained In Enforcement Of Arbitral Awards U/S 36 Of A&C Act: Orissa High Court
The Orissa High Court has recently held that objections under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure ('CPC') cannot be allowed to be raised in the enforcement proceeding of an arbitral award, as enunciated under the provision of Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('A & C Act').While bringing clarity as to applicability of Section 47 of CPC to arbitral proceedings,...
Mere Correction Of Typographical Error In Arbitral Award Does Not Extend Limitation Period For Plea U/S 34(3) Of A&C Act: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court held that mere correction of typographical error does not extend the period limitation for filing a petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act). The court further held that the limitation period begins from the date of disposal of an application under section 33 of the Arbitration Act and not from the date when a...
Performance Of Every Contract Would Be Jeopardised If Partial Breakdown Of Machinery Is Considered 'Force Majeure' Event: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court partly set aside an arbitral award which directed the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) to refund of Rs. 2 crore to M/s Murli Industries Ltd. holding that the finding of the arbitrator that breakdown of a machinery constituted a force majeure event cannot be sustained. The court however upheld the arbitrator's finding that the time was...
Hidden Doctrine In Gayatri Balasamy: How Supreme Court Used Implied Powers To Transform Arbitration Law
When the Supreme Court ruled on Gayatri Balasamy v. ISG Novasoft Technologies Ltd[1] it made waves, earning the title of the “modification judgment.” Most discussions centered on a key takeaway: Indian courts can now, in certain situations, modify arbitral awards rather than just nullifying them. However, if you dig a little deeper into those 61 pages, you'll uncover a more subtle yet significant shift. For the first time, the Court tapped into the Doctrine of Implied Powers to broaden the...
Pendency Of Appeal U/S 37 A&C Act Against First Award Does Not Bar Fresh Arbitration Proceedings: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court held that pendency of an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) does not prohibit a party from initiating a fresh round of arbitration when an earlier arbitral award has already been set aside. Accordingly, the present application under section 11 of the Arbitration Act was allowed and a sole...
Apportionment Of Liability Without Evidence Is Akin To 'Panchayati Approach': Bombay High Court Sets Aside NSE Arbitral Award Against Broker
The Bombay High Court set aside an arbitral award passed under National Stock Exchange (NSE) bye-laws that had upheld an order passed by Investor Grievance Redressal Panel (IGRP) directing Peerless Securities Limited to pay ₹7.18 lakhs to Vostok (Fareast) Securities Pvt. Ltd. for the losses caused by unauthorised trading in the trading and future segment. The IGRP had held that...
Claim For Demurrage As Liquidated Damages Does Not Constitute Debt Until Liability Is Determined: Andhra Pradesh High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court refused to grant interim relief for attachment of goods and security under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) holding that the liquidated damages in the form of demurrage does not constitute debt until the liability is determined by an arbitral award. Justice Challa Gunaranjan held that “petitioner has moved...
Mortgage, Enforcement And Related Declaratory Reliefs Are Non-Arbitrable: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court Bench of Justice Sandeep V Marne has observed that enforcement of mortgage is a right in rem and any dispute seeking enforcement of mortgage cannot be referred to arbitration. Civil suit will lie for enforcement of such a right in rem. Facts Defendant No.1 and his partners are developers appointed for redevelopment of Defendant No.5 – Society under...
Trial Court Can't Revisit Issue Of Limitation Once Delay Has Been Condoned By High Court: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) filed by Delhi Transco Limited (DTL) upholding an arbitral award in favour of M/s Hindustan Urban Infrastructure Limited. The Court further held that once an issue of limitation has already been decided by the High Court and the delay in filing the petition under...
Forced Shift Of Arbitration Venue Without Consent Of Party Amounts To Perversity: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court has held that the forced shift of the Arbitration Venue without the consent of a party amounts to perversity and patent lack of inherent jurisdiction.The order was passed in a writ petition, challenging a procedural order, by way of which the venue of the 'Closing hearing' was moved from New Delhi to IDRC in London without considering the objections of...
When High Court Appoints, High Court Extends: Clarifying Jurisdictional Anomaly Under Section 29A Of Arbitration Act
When Parliament introduced Section 29A into the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Arbitration Act”) it was hailed as a reform that would make arbitration faster and more disciplined.Section 29A of the Arbitration Act mandates that an arbitral award must be passed within twelve months from the date of completion of pleadings. This period may be further extended by mutual consent of the parties for an additional six months. Once this statutory period expires, the mandate of the arbitral...
[Arbitration Act] Limitation For Filing S.11 Application To Be Calculated From Date Of S.21 Notice, Not From Date Of Dispute: Rajasthan HC
The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, has held that the limitation for filing a Section 11 application under the A&C Act would be calculated from the date of serving the Section 21 notice to the other side and not from the date when the cause of action had arisen. The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand was hearing a Section 11 application praying for the appointment of...












![[Arbitration Act] Limitation For Filing S.11 Application To Be Calculated From Date Of S.21 Notice, Not From Date Of Dispute: Rajasthan HC [Arbitration Act] Limitation For Filing S.11 Application To Be Calculated From Date Of S.21 Notice, Not From Date Of Dispute: Rajasthan HC](https://www.livelaw.in/h-upload/2023/05/28/500x300_474032-justice-anoop-kumar-dhand.webp)