Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Supreme Court Clarifies “Seat” of Arbitration Under the Arbitration Act, 1996: BGS SGS SOMA JV vs. NHPC LTD. (2019) INSC 1052 (10 December 2019)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 20, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Commercial Courts Act, 2015 with Section 13, Judges, R.F. Nariman, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Clarifies “Seat” of Arbitration Under the Arbitration Act, 1996 Date of the Judgment: 10 December 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 1052 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J., Aniruddha Bose, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can a contractual clause specifying a venue for arbitration proceedings also be considered the “seat” of arbitration, thereby determining which courts have jurisdiction […]

Supreme Court Clarifies “Seat” of Arbitration Under the Arbitration Act, 1996: BGS SGS SOMA JV vs. NHPC LTD. (2019) INSC 1052 (10 December 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of arbitration under the Electricity Act in a dispute between a licensee and consumer: Hindustan Zinc vs. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam (2019)

/ Aniruddha Bose, 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, Dispute Resolution, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 42, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 86, Judges, Rohinton Fali Nariman, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitration Scope under Electricity Act: Hindustan Zinc vs. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam (2019) Date of the Judgment: December 04, 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 1148 Judges: Rohinton Fali Nariman, J., Aniruddha Bose, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can a dispute between a power distribution company and a consumer be resolved through arbitration under the

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of arbitration under the Electricity Act in a dispute between a licensee and consumer: Hindustan Zinc vs. Ajmer Vidyut Vitran Nigam (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Arbitrator’s Award in Land Development Dispute: Jagjeet Singh Lyallpuri vs. Unitop Apartments (2019)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 19, Arbitration Law with Section 34, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, R. Banumathi

Supreme Court Restores Arbitrator’s Award in Land Development Dispute: Jagjeet Singh Lyallpuri vs. Unitop Apartments (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitral award can be set aside for procedural lapses when parties agreed to the procedure. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Case Name: Jagjeet Singh Lyallpuri (dead) Through Lrs. & Ors. vs. M/s Unitop Apartments & Builders Ltd.

Supreme Court Restores Arbitrator’s Award in Land Development Dispute: Jagjeet Singh Lyallpuri vs. Unitop Apartments (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Limits High Court Intervention in Arbitration Matters: Deep Industries vs. ONGC (28 November 2019)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 5, Arbitration Proceedings, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 227, Judges, R.F. Nariman, Supervisory Jurisdiction, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Limits High Court Intervention in Arbitration Matters: Deep Industries vs. ONGC (2019) Date of the Judgment: 28 November 2019 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: R.F. Nariman, J., Aniruddha Bose, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can a High Court interfere with an order passed in an arbitration proceeding, especially when the Arbitration and Conciliation

Supreme Court Limits High Court Intervention in Arbitration Matters: Deep Industries vs. ONGC (28 November 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 11 of the Arbitration Act on Limitation: Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. vs. Northern Coal Field Ltd. (27 November 2019)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 16, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 21, Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 7, Indu Malhotra, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 11 of the Arbitration Act on Limitation: Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. vs. Northern Coal Field Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was correct in rejecting an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, on the grounds that it was barred by

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 11 of the Arbitration Act on Limitation: Uttarakhand Purv Sainik Kalyan Nigam Ltd. vs. Northern Coal Field Ltd. (27 November 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Strikes Down Section 87 of the Arbitration Act: Hindustan Construction Company vs. Union of India (2019)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 36, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 87, Arbitration Law, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Definition of Corporate Person, Fundamental Rights, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 3(7), Judges, R.F. Nariman, Surya Kant, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Strikes Down Section 87 of the Arbitration Act: Hindustan Construction Company vs. Union of India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Section 87 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the repeal of Section 26 of the 2015 Amendment Act are constitutionally valid. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law, Arbitration Law Case Name: Hindustan Construction Company

Supreme Court Strikes Down Section 87 of the Arbitration Act: Hindustan Construction Company vs. Union of India (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of International Commercial Arbitration and the impartiality of arbitrators: Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Anr. v. HSCC (India) Ltd. (26 November 2019)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 2(1)(f), Indu Malhotra, International Commercial Arbitration, Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit

Date of the Judgment: 26 November 2019 Citation: Not Available Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J., Indu Malhotra, J. Can a party to a contract appoint an arbitrator when that party has an interest in the outcome of the dispute? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in a set of arbitration applications, clarifying

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of International Commercial Arbitration and the impartiality of arbitrators: Perkins Eastman Architects DPC & Anr. v. HSCC (India) Ltd. (26 November 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Holds Directors Guilty of Contempt for Violating Orders in Daiichi Sankyo Case (15 November 2019)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Civil Contempt, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 with Section 2(b), Deepak Gupta, Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, Judges, Ranjan Gogoi, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Holds Directors Guilty of Contempt for Violating Orders in Daiichi Sankyo Case Date of the Judgment: 15 November 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 1137 Judges: Ranjan Gogoi, CJI, Deepak Gupta, J., Sanjiv Khanna, J. Can repeated assurances and undertakings given to a court be disregarded with impunity? The Supreme Court of India addressed this

Supreme Court Holds Directors Guilty of Contempt for Violating Orders in Daiichi Sankyo Case (15 November 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the effect of Amendment of Agreement on Arbitration Clause in construction contracts: WAPCOS Ltd. vs. Salma Dam Joint Venture (2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Accord and Satisfaction, Amendment of Agreement, Arbitration Agreement, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11(6), Arbitration Law, Contract Law, Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges

Supreme Court clarifies the effect of Amendment of Agreement on Arbitration Clause in construction contracts: WAPCOS Ltd. vs. Salma Dam Joint Venture (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an Amendment of Agreement (AoA) supersedes the original arbitration clause in a contract. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: WAPCOS Ltd. vs. Salma Dam Joint Venture & Anr. Judgment

Supreme Court clarifies the effect of Amendment of Agreement on Arbitration Clause in construction contracts: WAPCOS Ltd. vs. Salma Dam Joint Venture (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitrator Appointment in Railway Contracts: Union of India vs. Pradeep Vinod Construction Company (2019)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Appointment of Arbitrators, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration Law, Breach of contract, Contract Law, General Conditions of Contract, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, R. Banumathi

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitrator Appointment in Railway Contracts: Union of India vs. Pradeep Vinod Construction Company (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: The core legal issue revolves around the correct procedure for appointing arbitrators in disputes arising from railway contracts, especially when the contract specifies the appointment of railway officers as arbitrators. CASE TYPE: This case falls under

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitrator Appointment in Railway Contracts: Union of India vs. Pradeep Vinod Construction Company (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds “Excepted Matter” Clause in Construction Contract: Mitra Guha Builders vs. ONGC (2019)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 34, Arbitration Law with Section 37, Construction Contracts, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 2, Contract Law with Clause 25, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, R. Banumathi

Supreme Court Upholds “Excepted Matter” Clause in Construction Contract: Mitra Guha Builders vs. ONGC (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the levy of pre-estimated liquidated damages by a Superintending Engineer, as per a contract clause, is an arbitrable matter or an “excepted matter.” CASE TYPE: Contract/Arbitration Law Case Name: M/S. MITRA GUHA BUILDERS (INDIA) COMPANY vs. OIL

Supreme Court Upholds “Excepted Matter” Clause in Construction Contract: Mitra Guha Builders vs. ONGC (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Forfeiture of Security Deposit in Contract Dispute: Vijay Trading vs. Central Warehousing (2019)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 34, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 5(g), Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, R. Banumathi

Supreme Court Upholds Forfeiture of Security Deposit in Contract Dispute: Vijay Trading vs. Central Warehousing (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the forfeiture of a security deposit and detention of equipment by the Central Warehousing Corporation was justified due to a contractor’s failure to perform contractual obligations. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Case Name: M/s Vijay Trading and Transport

Supreme Court Upholds Forfeiture of Security Deposit in Contract Dispute: Vijay Trading vs. Central Warehousing (2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top