Monthly Digest Of Arbitration Cases: June 2022

Allahabad High Court Section 47 CPC Application Is Not Maintainable In Execution Proceedings Under Arbitration 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 under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940. The Single Bench of Justice Piyush Agarwal held that an arbitration award is not a decree as defined under Section 2(2) of CPC and therefore, the objection under section 47 of CPC, which can be filed only in execution of a decree (as defined under section 2(2) CPC), is not maintainable in the proceedings seeking execution of the award. Bombay High Court: A Reference To Arbitration Can Be Declined By The Court If The Dispute Is A Deadwood: Bombay High Court Case Title: D.K. Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. versus Kishore Agarwal and Anr. The Bombay High Court has held that once the Court is satisfied regarding the existence of an arbitration agreement between the parties, the Court can decline to make a reference to arbitration only if it is satisfied that the dispute is non-existent or that it has become a deadwood. The Single Bench of Justice N.J. Jamadar reiterated that the scope of enquiry under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is extremely limited and that the arbitrability of the dispute is required to be determined by the Arbitral Tribunal. Court Can Pass An Order Of Interim Measures Under Section9 Of The A&C Act Against A Third Party: Reiterates Bombay High Court Case Title: Choice Developers versus Pantnagar Pearl CHS Ltd. & Ors. The Bombay High Court has reiterated that the Court is free to pass an order under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) to grant interim measures of protection against a third party who is impleaded in the petition filed under Section 9. The Single Bench of Justice G.S. Kulkarni held that the minority members of a Society cannot act against the will of the majority members of the Society and obstruct the redevelopment work in the Society. Arbitral Proceedings Cannot Be Imposed On A Debenture Trustee Under A Scheme Of Compromise, In The Absence Of An Arbitration Agreement: Bombay High Court Case Title: HMG Industries Ltd. versus Canara Bank Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 224 The Bombay High Court has held that even though a Scheme of Compromise entered into under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956 overrides all the agreements between the affected parties, arbitral proceedings cannot be imposed by a Company on a Debenture Trustee by virtue of the said Scheme only, in the absence of an arbitration agreement between them. The Single Bench of Justice A.K. Menon ruled that the Debenture Trustee was an independent obligation of the Company and thus, the arbitration clause contained in the Scheme was not binding on the Debenture Trustee Mere Pendency Of A Civil Suit Is Not An Absolute Bar To A Petition Under Section 11Of The A&C Act: Bombay High Court Case Title: Priya Rishi Bhuta & Anr. versus Vardhaman Engineers and Builders & Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Bom) 221 The High Court of Bombay has held that mere pendency of a Civil Suit is not an absolute bar to a petition under Section 11 of the A&C Act as long as the petitioner can withdraw its suit before the defendant files its statement on the issue. The Single Bench of Justice G.S. Kulkarni held that it is also permissible for the Civil Court to consider an application of the plaintiff to permit withdrawal of the suit when there is an arbitration agreement, and refer the parties for arbitration. Undisputed Claims Can't Be Set-Off Against Unliquidated Damages That Are Not Ascertained:Bombay High Court The Bombay High Court recently has observed that set-off of unliquidated damages that are not ascertained or admitted against an undisputed claim is not tenable. Single judge G.S. KULKARNI reiterated that a Section 9 Court would not be unduly bound by procedural law contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the underlying principle being to make arbitration an effective form of dispute resolution; and that a performance bank guarantee ("PBG") cannot be invoked contrary to the provision for its invocation in the PBG itself. Chhattisgarh High Court Arbitral Award Vitiated By Serious Fraud And Criminal Conspiracy Can Be Set Aside In A Writ Petition: Chhattisgarh High Court The High Court of Chhattisgarh has held that an arbitral award that is vitiated by fraud and criminal conspiracy would be void and non-est and can be set aside in a Writ Petition and the availability of an alternative remedy under Section 34 of the A&C Act is not a bar to the maintainability of the petition. The Division Bench of Chief Justice Anup Kumar Goswami...

Monthly Digest Of Arbitration Cases: June 2022

ausaf ayyub

Tags