Arbitration Law

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 Upholds Arbitration Award in Dispute Over Restaurant License Agreements: Arun Kumar Kamal Kumar vs. Selected Marble Home (2020)

/ Arbitration Act, 1940, Arbitration Law, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Damages in Arbitration, Judges, License Agreements, N.V. Ramana, Property Law, Property Law with Section 108, S. Abdul Nazeer, Surya Kant, Transfer of Property Act

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Award in Dispute Over Restaurant License Agreements: Arun Kumar Kamal Kumar vs. Selected Marble Home (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitrator was justified in awarding damages for use and occupation of premises based on commission, when the agreement did not explicitly provide for such damages. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Case Name: M/S

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Award in Dispute Over Restaurant License Agreements: Arun Kumar Kamal Kumar vs. Selected Marble Home (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for Enforcing Foreign Awards in Arbitration Cases: Government of India vs. Vedanta Limited (2020)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 47, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 48, Arbitration Law, Contract Law, Contract Law with Article 15.5, Enforcement of Foreign Awards, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Article 137, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 5, Production Sharing Contract, S. Abdul Nazeer

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for Enforcing Foreign Awards: Government of India vs. Vedanta Limited (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Limitation period for enforcing foreign arbitral awards in India. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Government of India vs. Vedanta Limited [Judgment Date]: 16 September 2020 Date of the Judgment: 16 September 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 728 Judges:

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation for Enforcing Foreign Awards in Arbitration Cases: Government of India vs. Vedanta Limited (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 »

Supreme Court Grants Bail in Gujarat Maritime Board Case: Jinofer Kawasji Bhujwala vs. State of Gujarat (2020)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 17, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 9, Ashok Bhushan, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 406, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 420, Judges, M.R. Shah, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13(1)(d), V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Grants Bail in Gujarat Maritime Board Case: Jinofer Kawasji Bhujwala vs. State of Gujarat (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether bail should be granted to an accused when the trial has not commenced despite the filing of a charge sheet and the accused has been in custody for a significant period. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case

Supreme Court Grants Bail in Gujarat Maritime Board Case: Jinofer Kawasji Bhujwala vs. State of Gujarat (2020) Read Post »

Scroll to Top