Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37

Supreme Court settles arbitration involving stockbroker, husband, and wife, clarifying jurisdiction and liability: AC Chokshi Share Broker vs. Jatin Pratap Desai (2025) INSC 174 (10 February 2025)

/ Arbitration Agreement, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Bombay Stock Exchange Bye-Laws, 1957, Bombay Stock Exchange Bye-Laws, 1957 with Bye-law 248(a), Judges, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Sandeep Mehta

Date of the Judgment: 10 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 174 Judges: Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J., Sandeep Mehta, J. When a stockbroker initiates arbitration to recover losses from a client’s account, can the client’s spouse be held jointly liable for the debt? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a recent case involving […]

Supreme Court settles arbitration involving stockbroker, husband, and wife, clarifying jurisdiction and liability: AC Chokshi Share Broker vs. Jatin Pratap Desai (2025) INSC 174 (10 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Settles Contractual Interpretation: Somdatt Builders vs. NHAI (27 January 2025)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Contract Law, Contract Law with General Conditions of Contract (GCC), Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, Ujjal Bhuyan

LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of contract clauses regarding variations in quantity of work. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Somdatt Builders –NCC – NEC(JV) vs. National Highways Authority of India & Ors. Judgment Date: 27 January 2025 Date of the Judgment: 27 January 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 113 Judges: Abhay S. Oka, J. and Ujjal Bhuyan,

Supreme Court Settles Contractual Interpretation: Somdatt Builders vs. NHAI (27 January 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Limited Scope of Appellate Review in Arbitration Cases: Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. vs. M/S Sanman Rice Mills (2024)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards

Supreme Court Clarifies Limited Scope of Appellate Review in Arbitration Cases: Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. vs. M/S Sanman Rice Mills (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of appellate court’s powers under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited & Anr. vs.

Supreme Court Clarifies Limited Scope of Appellate Review in Arbitration Cases: Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. vs. M/S Sanman Rice Mills (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the power of remand in Section 37 Arbitration Act Appeals: Bombay Slum Redevelopment vs. Samir Narain Bhojwani (2024)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37

Supreme Court on Remand in Arbitration Appeals: Bombay Slum Redevelopment vs. Samir Narain Bhojwani (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of appellate court’s power to remand a case under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Bombay Slum Redevelopment Corporation Private Limited vs. Samir Narain Bhojwani [Judgment Date]: July

Supreme Court clarifies the power of remand in Section 37 Arbitration Act Appeals: Bombay Slum Redevelopment vs. Samir Narain Bhojwani (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Arbitrator’s Award, Emphasizes Limited Court Interference in Arbitration Cases: S.V. Samudram vs. State of Karnataka (2024) INSC 17 (4 January 2024)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37

Supreme Court Restores Arbitrator’s Award, Emphasizes Limited Court Interference in Arbitration Cases Date of the Judgment: 4th January 2024 Citation: (2024) INSC 17 Judges: Abhay S. Oka J., Sanjay Karol J. Can a court modify an arbitrator’s award, or is its role limited to setting aside the award if it finds errors? The Supreme Court

Supreme Court Restores Arbitrator’s Award, Emphasizes Limited Court Interference in Arbitration Cases: S.V. Samudram vs. State of Karnataka (2024) INSC 17 (4 January 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Belated Claim in Insolvency: RPS Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Mukul Kumar (2023)

/ Arbitral Award, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 60(5)

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Belated Claim in Insolvency: RPS Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Mukul Kumar (2023) Date of the Judgment: September 11, 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 816 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. and Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Can a creditor, who missed the initial deadline, have their claim considered after the resolution plan has been approved

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Belated Claim in Insolvency: RPS Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Mukul Kumar (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award on Power Purchase Agreement Dispute: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Goa (2023) INSC 514

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 28, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Dinesh Maheshwari, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 86(1)(f), Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 114, Judges, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award on Power Purchase Agreement Dispute Date of the Judgment: 10 May 2023 Citation: (2023) INSC 514 Judges: Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjay Kumar. This was a unanimous decision by a two-judge bench, with the opinion authored by Justice Dinesh Maheshwari. Can an arbitral award be overturned by a court simply

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award on Power Purchase Agreement Dispute: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Goa (2023) INSC 514 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award on Power Purchase Agreement: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Goa (2023)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 28, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Contract Law, Contract Law with Fuel Supply Contract, Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges, Power Purchase Agreement, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award on Power Purchase Agreement: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Goa (2023) Date of the Judgment: May 10, 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 448 Judges: Dinesh Maheshwari, J., Sanjay Kumar, J. Can a court interfere with an arbitrator’s decision on a complex commercial contract? The Supreme Court recently addressed this question

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award on Power Purchase Agreement: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Goa (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies interest calculation on decreed amounts: Nepa Limited vs. Manoj Kumar Agrawal (2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXI, Rule 1, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna, Sudhanshu Dhulia

Supreme Court Clarifies Interest Calculation on Decreed Amounts: Nepa Limited vs. Manoj Kumar Agrawal (2022) Date of the Judgment: 08 December 2022 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Sanjiv Khanna, J. and Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. Can interest be claimed on a decreed amount when a portion of it has already been paid and withdrawn by

Supreme Court clarifies interest calculation on decreed amounts: Nepa Limited vs. Manoj Kumar Agrawal (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Counterclaim in Arbitration Despite Contractual Dispute Resolution Clause: National Highway Authority of India vs. Transstroy (India) Limited (2022) INSC 603 (11 July 2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 23, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Contractual Dispute Resolution Clause, Judges, M.R. Shah, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Allows Counterclaim in Arbitration Despite Contractual Dispute Resolution Clause Date of the Judgment: 11 July 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 603 Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and Sanjiv Khanna, J. Can a party be barred from filing a counterclaim in arbitration if they haven’t followed a pre-arbitration conciliation process, even if the main dispute is

Supreme Court Allows Counterclaim in Arbitration Despite Contractual Dispute Resolution Clause: National Highway Authority of India vs. Transstroy (India) Limited (2022) INSC 603 (11 July 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Arbitrator’s Award: Haryana Tourism Ltd. vs. Kandhari Beverages Ltd. (2022)

/ Appellate Review, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Restores Arbitrator’s Award: Haryana Tourism Ltd. vs. Kandhari Beverages Ltd. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: The scope of appellate review under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Haryana Tourism Limited vs. M/s Kandhari Beverages Limited [Judgment Date]: January 11, 2022 Introduction Date of the Judgment: January

Supreme Court Restores Arbitrator’s Award: Haryana Tourism Ltd. vs. Kandhari Beverages Ltd. (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Award: Haryana Tourism vs. Kandhari Beverages (2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Award: Haryana Tourism vs. Kandhari Beverages (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of appellate jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law. Case Name: Haryana Tourism Limited vs. M/s Kandhari Beverages Limited. Judgment Date: January 11, 2022 Date of the Judgment: January 11, 2022. Citation: (2022)

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Award: Haryana Tourism vs. Kandhari Beverages (2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top