Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Supreme Court clarifies definition of “International Commercial Arbitration” in Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. Ravindranath Rao Sindhia & Anr. (2021) INSC 105 (04 March 2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 2(1)(f), B.R. Gavai, International Commercial Arbitration, Judges, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies “International Commercial Arbitration” in Amway Dispute Date of the Judgment: 04 March 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 105 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J., B.R. Gavai, J. Can a dispute between an Indian company and individuals who are nationals and residents of the USA be considered an “international commercial arbitration,” even if the business is […]

Supreme Court clarifies definition of “International Commercial Arbitration” in Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. Ravindranath Rao Sindhia & Anr. (2021) INSC 105 (04 March 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for Challenging Arbitral Awards: Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. vs. Navigant Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (2 March 2021)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 29, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 31, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Indu Malhotra, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for Challenging Arbitral Awards: Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. vs. Navigant Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the commencement date for the limitation period to challenge an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for Challenging Arbitral Awards: Dakshin Haryana Bijli Vitran Nigam Ltd. vs. Navigant Technologies Pvt. Ltd. (2 March 2021) Read Post »

Arbitration Clause Superseded: Supreme Court Appoints Sole Arbitrator in GR Green Life Energy vs. Leitwind Shriram Manufacturing Dispute (22 February 2021)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 with Section 24

Supreme Court Appoints Sole Arbitrator in GR Green Life Energy vs. Leitwind Shriram Manufacturing Dispute (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Appointment of a Sole Arbitrator by the Supreme Court, superseding the original arbitration clause. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Case Name: GR Green Life Energy Pvt. Ltd. vs. Leitwind Shriram Manufacturing Pvt. Ltd. Judgment Date: 22 February 2021 Introduction

Arbitration Clause Superseded: Supreme Court Appoints Sole Arbitrator in GR Green Life Energy vs. Leitwind Shriram Manufacturing Dispute (22 February 2021) Read Post »

Arbitration Re-Initiated: Supreme Court Orders Fresh Adjudication in NHAI vs. Progressive Construction Dispute (12 February 2021)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 26, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 29A, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 34, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Arbitration in NHAI vs. Progressive Construction Dispute (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitral award can be set aside on the ground of incorrect inferences drawn from documents and non-consideration of vital evidence. CASE TYPE: Arbitration. Case Name: National Highways Authority of India vs. M/s. Progressive Construction Ltd. Judgment Date: 12 February

Arbitration Re-Initiated: Supreme Court Orders Fresh Adjudication in NHAI vs. Progressive Construction Dispute (12 February 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies appealability of order refusing to condone delay under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act: Chintels India Ltd. vs. Bhayana Builders Pvt. Ltd. (2021) INSC 70 (11 February 2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 133, Constitutional Law with Article 134A, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Navin Sinha, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies Appealability of Delay Condonation Rejection in Arbitration Cases LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an order refusing to condone delay in filing an application to set aside an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is appealable under Section 37 of the same Act. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Case Name: Chintels

Supreme Court clarifies appealability of order refusing to condone delay under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act: Chintels India Ltd. vs. Bhayana Builders Pvt. Ltd. (2021) INSC 70 (11 February 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Appoints Sole Arbitrator Due to Ineligibility of Government Official: Haryana Space Application Centre vs. Pan India Consultants (20 January 2021)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 12(5), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 29A(6), Indu Malhotra, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Seventh Schedule, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Supreme Court Appoints Sole Arbitrator Due to Ineligibility of Government Official: Haryana Space Application Centre vs. Pan India Consultants (2021) Date of the Judgment: 20 January 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 21 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao J., Indu Malhotra J., Ajay Rastogi J. Can a government official, who is part of the management of a state

Supreme Court Appoints Sole Arbitrator Due to Ineligibility of Government Official: Haryana Space Application Centre vs. Pan India Consultants (20 January 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Enforceability of Arbitration Agreements in Unstamped Contracts: NN Global Mercantile vs. Indo Unique Flame Ltd. (2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 16, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 8, Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 17, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 7, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indira Banerjee, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958, Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 with Section 33, Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 with Section 34

Supreme Court Clarifies Enforceability of Arbitration Agreements in Unstamped Contracts: NN Global Mercantile vs. Indo Unique Flame Ltd. (2021) Date of the Judgment: January 11, 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 19 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J., Indu Malhotra, J., and Indira Banerjee, J. (authored by Indu Malhotra, J.) Can an arbitration agreement within an unstamped

Supreme Court Clarifies Enforceability of Arbitration Agreements in Unstamped Contracts: NN Global Mercantile vs. Indo Unique Flame Ltd. (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Intervention in Arbitration: Bhaven Construction vs. Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. (2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 16, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 5, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Constitutional Law with Article 227, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, N.V. Ramana, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Clarifies Intervention in Arbitration: Bhaven Construction vs. Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can interfere with an ongoing arbitration process under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Bhaven Construction Through Authorised Signatory Premjibhai K. Shah vs. Executive Engineer Sardar Sarovar

Supreme Court Clarifies Intervention in Arbitration: Bhaven Construction vs. Sardar Sarovar Narmada Nigam Ltd. (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Award in Coal Supply Dispute: Anglo American Metallurgical Coal vs. MMTC Ltd. (2020)

/ Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 34, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 94, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 95, International Commercial Arbitration, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Rohinton Fali Nariman

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Award in Coal Supply Dispute: Anglo American Metallurgical Coal vs. MMTC Ltd. (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitral award can be set aside for perversity when the tribunal’s findings are based on a possible interpretation of the evidence, and whether the court can re-evaluate evidence in such cases. CASE TYPE: International

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Award in Coal Supply Dispute: Anglo American Metallurgical Coal vs. MMTC Ltd. (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitrability of Landlord-Tenant Disputes and Scope of Judicial Review: Vidya Drolia vs. Durga Trading Corporation (2020) INSC 804 (14 December 2020)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 7, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 8, Judges, Krishna Murari, N.V. Ramana, Sanjiv Khanna, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 111, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 114A

Can landlord-tenant disputes be resolved through arbitration, or are they exclusively reserved for civil courts? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this critical question, clarifying the legal position on arbitrability of such disputes and also the scope of judicial review under Sections 8 and 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This judgment

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitrability of Landlord-Tenant Disputes and Scope of Judicial Review: Vidya Drolia vs. Durga Trading Corporation (2020) INSC 804 (14 December 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction over foreign arbitral awards: Noy Vallesina Engineering vs. Jindal Drugs Limited (26 November 2020)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 48, Enforcement of Foreign Awards, Indira Banerjee, Judges, S. Ravindra Bhat

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction over Foreign Arbitral Awards: Noy Vallesina Engineering vs. Jindal Drugs Limited (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a foreign arbitral award can be challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Noy Vallesina Engineering SpA vs. Jindal Drugs Limited & Ors. Judgment Date: 26

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction over foreign arbitral awards: Noy Vallesina Engineering vs. Jindal Drugs Limited (26 November 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies arbitration clause applicability in Balasore Alloys vs. Medima LLC (16 September 2020)

/ A. S. Bopanna, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 11, International Commercial Arbitration, Judges, S. A. Bobde, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court clarifies arbitration clause applicability in Balasore Alloys vs. Medima LLC LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the correct arbitration clause when multiple agreements exist between the same parties for the same transaction. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Balasore Alloys Limited vs. Medima LLC Judgment Date: 16 September 2020 Date of the Judgment: 16 September 2020

Supreme Court clarifies arbitration clause applicability in Balasore Alloys vs. Medima LLC (16 September 2020) Read Post »

Scroll to Top