Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

Supreme Court settles jurisdiction of Commercial Courts in Arbitration Matters: Jaycee Housing Pvt. Ltd. vs. Registrar (General), Orissa High Court (2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 2(1)(e), Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Commercial Courts Act, 2015 with Section 10, Commercial Courts Act, 2015 with Section 21, Commercial Courts Act, 2015 with Section 3, Judges, Krishna Murari, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of Commercial Courts in Arbitration Cases LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Civil Judge (Senior Division) designated as a Commercial Court can hear arbitration matters, given the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law, Commercial Law Case Name: Jaycee Housing Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. vs. Registrar (General), Orissa […]

Supreme Court settles jurisdiction of Commercial Courts in Arbitration Matters: Jaycee Housing Pvt. Ltd. vs. Registrar (General), Orissa High Court (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Appoints New Arbitrator in Sunil Jain Case: Arbitration Dispute (19 October 2022)

/ Appointment of Arbitrator, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 15, Arbitration Law, Judges, Krishna Murari, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Appoints New Arbitrator in Sunil Jain Case: Arbitration Dispute (19 October 2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Appointment of a new arbitrator due to the death of the previously appointed arbitrator. CASE TYPE: Arbitration. Case Name: Sunil Jain (D) Thr. LRs. and Anr. vs. Chandra Kala & Anr. Judgment Date: 19 October 2022 Date of the

Supreme Court Appoints New Arbitrator in Sunil Jain Case: Arbitration Dispute (19 October 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court allows withdrawal of CIRP application before constitution of Committee of Creditors in Insolvency Cases (22 September 2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), Indira Banerjee, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 12A, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 7, J.K. Maheshwari, Judges

Supreme Court Allows Withdrawal of CIRP Application Before CoC Formation LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an application for Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) can be withdrawn before the constitution of the Committee of Creditors (CoC). CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: Ashok G. Rajani vs. Beacon Trusteeship Ltd. & Ors. Judgment Date: 22 September 2022 Introduction Date

Supreme Court allows withdrawal of CIRP application before constitution of Committee of Creditors in Insolvency Cases (22 September 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Interim Order for Deposit of Awarded Amount in Arbitration Case: Sepco vs. Power Mech (19 September 2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 36, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 9, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order 41 Rule 5, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Krishna Murari

Supreme Court Upholds Interim Order for Deposit of Awarded Amount in Arbitration Case: Sepco vs. Power Mech LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a court can order a party to deposit the full arbitral award amount as a condition for staying the award’s enforcement. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Sepco Electric Power Construction Corporation vs. Power Mech

Supreme Court Upholds Interim Order for Deposit of Awarded Amount in Arbitration Case: Sepco vs. Power Mech (19 September 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Clause Despite Missing “Final and Binding” Wording in Development Agreement: Babanrao Rajaram Pund vs. M/s. Samarth Builders & Developers (2022)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 7, Contract Law, Contract Law with Arbitration Clause, Development Agreement, Judges, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Clause Despite Missing “Final and Binding” Wording in Development Agreement: Babanrao Rajaram Pund vs. M/s. Samarth Builders & Developers (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a clause in a development agreement constitutes a valid arbitration agreement even if it does not explicitly state that the arbitrator’s decision will be “final and binding.” CASE

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Clause Despite Missing “Final and Binding” Wording in Development Agreement: Babanrao Rajaram Pund vs. M/s. Samarth Builders & Developers (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies arbitrator’s discretion in awarding post-award interest: Morgan Securities vs. Videocon Industries (2022)

/ Arbitral Award, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 31(7), AS Bopanna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Interest in Arbitration, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitrator’s Power on Post-Award Interest in Morgan Securities vs. Videocon Industries (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of arbitrator’s discretion to award post-award interest under Section 31(7)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Morgan Securities And Credits Pvt. Ltd. vs. Videocon Industries Ltd. Judgment Date: 01 September

Supreme Court clarifies arbitrator’s discretion in awarding post-award interest: Morgan Securities vs. Videocon Industries (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitration Agreement Requirements in Mahanadi Coalfields Case (25 July 2022)

/ A S Bopanna, Arbitration Agreement, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 2(b), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 7, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 15, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Dispute Resolution, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitration Agreement Requirements in Mahanadi Coalfields Case (25 July 2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a clause titled “Settlement of Disputes/Arbitration” that provides for dispute resolution at the company level and refers to courts of law for other disputes constitutes a valid arbitration agreement. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Mahanadi Coalfields Ltd &

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitration Agreement Requirements in Mahanadi Coalfields Case (25 July 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdictional issues in arbitration: General Manager East Coast Railway vs. Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. (22 July 2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11(6), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 42, Arbitration Law, B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdictional Issues in Arbitration: General Manager East Coast Railway vs. Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the correct jurisdiction for arbitration proceedings when prior applications have been filed in a different court. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: General Manager East Coast Railway Rail Sadan & Anr. vs. Hindustan Construction

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdictional issues in arbitration: General Manager East Coast Railway vs. Hindustan Construction Co. Ltd. (22 July 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of ‘Notified Claims’ in Arbitration: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. NCC Ltd. (20 July 2022)

/ Arbitration Agreement, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, B.V. Nagarathna, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Interpretation of Contract, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of ‘Notified Claims’ in Arbitration: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. NCC Ltd. (2022) Date of the Judgment: 20 July 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 614 Judges: M.R. Shah, J., B.V. Nagarathna, J. Can a dispute regarding whether a claim qualifies as a ‘Notified Claim’ under a contract be decided by an

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of ‘Notified Claims’ in Arbitration: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. NCC Ltd. (20 July 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restricts Amendment of Pleadings to Challenge Mortgages: Asian Hotels (North) Ltd. vs. Alok Kumar Lodha & Ors. (2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 8, B.V. Nagarathna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order 1 Rule 10, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order 6 Rule 17, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 125, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 126, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Restricts Amendment of Pleadings to Challenge Mortgages: Asian Hotels (North) Ltd. vs. Alok Kumar Lodha & Ors. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a plaintiff can amend their suit to challenge mortgages on a property when their original suit concerns the revocation of a license agreement. CASE TYPE: Civil. Case Name: Asian Hotels (North) Ltd.

Supreme Court Restricts Amendment of Pleadings to Challenge Mortgages: Asian Hotels (North) Ltd. vs. Alok Kumar Lodha & Ors. (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Holds Avitel in Contempt for Not Maintaining USD 60 Million Balance: HSBC PI Holdings vs. Pradeep Shantipershad Jain (2022)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 9, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 129, Contempt of Court, Contempt of Courts Act, Contempt of Courts Act with willful disobedience, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Holds Avitel in Contempt for Not Maintaining USD 60 Million Balance: HSBC PI Holdings vs. Pradeep Shantipershad Jain (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether non-compliance with a court order to maintain a specific bank balance constitutes contempt of court, even if the order is executable through other means. CASE TYPE: Contempt of Court Case Name:

Supreme Court Holds Avitel in Contempt for Not Maintaining USD 60 Million Balance: HSBC PI Holdings vs. Pradeep Shantipershad Jain (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 »

Scroll to Top