Arbitration And Conciliation Act: 20 Recent SC Judgments

Former Employee Not Disqualified From Acting As An Arbitrator, Even After 2015 Amendment The Government of Haryana, PWD Haryana (B and R) Branch V. M/s. G.F. Toll Road Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. The Supreme Court held that the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, does not disqualify a former employee from acting as an arbitrator, provided that there are no justifiable doubts as to his independence and impartiality. The bench of Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre and Justice Indu Malhotra observed that, even after 2015 amendment, the position remains the same, as Entry 1 to 5th Schedule of the Act does not include "past/former employees." Mere Delay In Passing The Award By Itself Cannot Be The Ground To Appoint Another Arbitrator Rajasthan Small Industries Corporation Limited V. M/S Ganesh Containers Movers Syndicate In this case, it was observed that mere neglect of an arbitrator to act or delay in passing the award by itself cannot be the ground to appoint another arbitrator in deviation from the terms agreed to by the parties.The bench comprising of Justice R. Banumathi and Justice Indira Banerjee held thus while considering appeal against Rajasthan High Court order appointing a retired District Judge as the sole arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties, by allowing application under Section 11 and Section 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, filed by contractor. Arbitral Tribunal Cannot Award Interest If Agreement Expressly Bars Its Payment Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. V. Tehri Hydro Developmentcorporation India Ltd. It was reiterated that arbitrator cannot award interest on award if the agreement expressly prohibits grant of interest. The bench of Justices A K Sikri, Abdul Nazeer and M R Shah dismissed an appeal to uphold a judgment of Delhi High Court, which had set aside an arbitration award to the extent it granted interest overlooking the prohibition in the agreement. Independent Assessment Of Merits Of Award Cannot Be Made In An Arbitration Appeal MMTC Ltd. V. M/S Vedanta Ltd. The Supreme Court observed that, a court while considering an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award.The bench comprising Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and Justice Vineet Saran observed that, in such appeals, the court must only ascertain that the exercise of power by the Court under Section 34 has not exceeded the scope of the provision. Maintainability Of Execution Case To Be Considered Along With Issue Of Enforceability Of Foreign Award LMJ International Ltd. V. Sleepwell Industries Co. Ltd. The Apex Court observed that piecemeal consideration of the issue of maintainability of the execution case concerning the foreign awards, in the first place; and then the issue of enforceability thereof, is not envisaged under the scheme of Section 48 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The bench comprising Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice Ajay Rastogi observed that the Court is expected to consider both these aspects viz. maintainability and enforceability, simultaneously at the threshold. Pre-Deposit Clauses To Invoke Arbitration Makes Arbitral Process Ineffective And Expensive M/S ICOMM Tele LTD. V.Punjab State Water Supply & Sewerage Board & Anr. In this case, the Court observed that pre-deposit clauses to invoke arbitration would render the arbitral process ineffective and expensive.The bench comprising Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman and Justice Vineet Saran struck down such a clause in a notice inviting tender by Punjab State Water Supply & Sewerage Board. Court Can Appoint Independent Arbitrator Only After Resorting To The Procedure In Arbitration Agreement Union Of India V. Parmar Construction Company The Supreme Court observed that the High Court, while dealing with an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, seeking appointment of an 'independent Arbitrator', should first resort to the mechanism in appointment of an arbitrator as per the terms of contract as agreed by the parties. One of the issue in a batch of appeals was whether it was permissible for the High Court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (prior to the Amendment Act, 2015) to appoint third party or an independent Arbitrator when the parties have mutually agreed for the procedure vis-à-vis the authority to appoint the designated arbitrator. Court Can't Appoint Arbitrator When The Contract Containing Arbitration Clause Is Insufficiently Stamped Garware Wall Ropes Ltd vs. Coastal Marine Constructions & Engineering Ltd. The Supreme Court held that it would be necessary for the Court before considering and passing final orders on an application under Section 11(6) of the Act to await the adjudication by ...

Arbitration And Conciliation Act: 20 Recent SC Judgments

Ashok Kini

Tags