Arbitration Law Archives

Supreme Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award Due to Arbitrator’s Conflict of Interest: Vinod Bhaiyalal Jain & Ors. vs. Wadhwani Parmeshwari Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. (24 July 2019)

July 24, 2019 / A.S. Bopanna, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 12, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 13, Arbitration Law, Conflict of Interest, Impartiality of Arbitrator, Judges, R. Banumathi, Setting Aside Arbitral Award

Supreme Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award Due to Arbitrator’s Conflict of Interest: Vinod Bhaiyalal Jain & Ors. vs. Wadhwani Parmeshwari Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitrator’s prior professional relationship with one of the parties constitutes a conflict of interest, warranting the setting aside of the arbitral award. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law […]

Supreme Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award Due to Arbitrator’s Conflict of Interest: Vinod Bhaiyalal Jain & Ors. vs. Wadhwani Parmeshwari Cold Storage Pvt. Ltd. (24 July 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Stay on Arbitration Awards Against Government: PAM Developments vs. State of West Bengal (2019)

July 12, 2019 / Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 36, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XLI Rule 5, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXVII Rule 8A, Enforcement of Arbitral Award, Judges, R.F. Nariman, Stay of Arbitral Award, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Clarifies Stay on Arbitration Awards Against Government: PAM Developments vs. State of West Bengal (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a government can obtain an unconditional stay on an arbitral award for payment of money, by using Order XXVII Rule 8A of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), or whether the court should impose conditions

Supreme Court Clarifies Stay on Arbitration Awards Against Government: PAM Developments vs. State of West Bengal (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Arbitration Fees: NHAI vs. Gayatri Jhansi Roadways (2019)

July 10, 2019 / Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 31, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 31A, Judges, R.F. Nariman, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Arbitration Fees: NHAI vs. Gayatri Jhansi Roadways (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the fee schedule for arbitrators can be determined by a prior agreement between the parties, or if it must follow the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, regardless of any agreement. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name:

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Arbitration Fees: NHAI vs. Gayatri Jhansi Roadways (2019) Read Post »

Arbitration Clause Invoked: Supreme Court Appoints Arbitrator in Dispute Between Nirmal Software and Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University (2019)

July 9, 2019 / Abhay Manohar Sapre, Appointment of Arbitrator, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 12, Contract Law, Contractual Agreements, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)

Supreme Court Appoints Arbitrator in Nirmal Software Services vs. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a dispute arising from a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) containing an arbitration clause should be referred to arbitration. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Nirmal Software Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University & Ors. [Judgment

Arbitration Clause Invoked: Supreme Court Appoints Arbitrator in Dispute Between Nirmal Software and Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies Group of Companies Doctrine in Arbitration: Reckitt Benckiser vs. Reynders Label Printing (2019)

July 1, 2019 / A.M. Khanwilkar, Ajay Rastogi, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 7, Group of Companies Doctrine, Judges

Supreme Court clarifies Group of Companies Doctrine in Arbitration: Reckitt Benckiser vs. Reynders Label Printing (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a non-signatory to an arbitration agreement can be impleaded in arbitration proceedings under the “group of companies” doctrine. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Reckitt Benckiser (India) Private Limited vs. Reynders Label Printing India Private Limited

Supreme Court clarifies Group of Companies Doctrine in Arbitration: Reckitt Benckiser vs. Reynders Label Printing (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Partially Upholds Arbitration Award on Coal Price Escalation: Parsa Kente Collieries vs. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam (2019)

May 27, 2019 / Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Arun Mishra, Contract Interpretation, Contract Law, Force Majeure, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Partially Upholds Arbitration Award on Coal Price Escalation: Parsa Kente Collieries vs. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the arbitral award passed by the learned Arbitrator, confirmed by the learned Commercial Court, in an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and

Supreme Court Partially Upholds Arbitration Award on Coal Price Escalation: Parsa Kente Collieries vs. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Contract Terms in Ssangyong vs. NHAI Price Adjustment Dispute: Civil Appeal No. 4779 of 2019 (08 May 2019)

May 8, 2019 / Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 18, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 24(3), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Interpretation of Contract, Judges, R.F. Nariman, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Upholds Contract Terms in Ssangyong vs. NHAI Price Adjustment Dispute Date of the Judgment: 08 May 2019 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 4779 of 2019 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J., Vineet Saran, J. Can a government body unilaterally change a contract’s price adjustment formula? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a dispute between Ssangyong

Supreme Court Upholds Contract Terms in Ssangyong vs. NHAI Price Adjustment Dispute: Civil Appeal No. 4779 of 2019 (08 May 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Waiver of Arbitrator Ineligibility under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act: Bharat Broadband Network Ltd. vs. United Telecoms Ltd. (2019)

April 16, 2019 / Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 12(5), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 4, Arbitrator Ineligibility, Express and Implied Promises, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 9, Judges, R.F. Nariman, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Clarifies Waiver of Arbitrator Ineligibility under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act: Bharat Broadband Network Ltd. vs. United Telecoms Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, specifically regarding the waiver of arbitrator ineligibility. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Bharat Broadband Network Limited vs. United

Supreme Court Clarifies Waiver of Arbitrator Ineligibility under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act: Bharat Broadband Network Ltd. vs. United Telecoms Ltd. (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies the Effect of Unstamped Arbitration Agreements: Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. vs. Coastal Marine Constructions & Engineering Ltd. (2019)

April 10, 2019 / Arbitration Agreement, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 16, Impounding of Instruments, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 2, Indian Stamp Act, 1899, Indian Stamp Act, 1899 with Section 33, Indian Stamp Act, 1899 with Section 34, Judges, R.F. Nariman, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Clarifies the Effect of Unstamped Arbitration Agreements: Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. vs. Coastal Marine Constructions & Engineering Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: The enforceability of an arbitration agreement contained in an unstamped contract. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. vs. Coastal Marine Constructions & Engineering Ltd. [Judgment Date]: April 10,

Supreme Court Clarifies the Effect of Unstamped Arbitration Agreements: Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. vs. Coastal Marine Constructions & Engineering Ltd. (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Arbitration Clauses, Limits Interference: Union of India vs. Parmar Construction Company (2019)

March 29, 2019 / A.M. Khanwilkar, Ajay Rastogi, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11(6), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 21, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 26, Contract Law, Contract Law with 'No Claim' Certificates, Contract Law with Arbitration Clause, Judges

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Arbitration Clauses, Limits Interference: Union of India vs. Parmar Construction Company (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can appoint an independent arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, when the parties have already agreed to a specific procedure for arbitrator appointment in their contract, and whether

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Arbitration Clauses, Limits Interference: Union of India vs. Parmar Construction Company (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Discharge Voucher in Insurance Claim Dispute: United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Antique Art Exports Pvt. Ltd. (28 March 2019)

March 28, 2019 / A.M. Khanwilkar, Accord and Satisfaction, Ajay Rastogi, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11(6), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11(6A), Coercion, Contract Law, Judges

Supreme Court Upholds Discharge Voucher in Insurance Claim Dispute: United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Antique Art Exports Pvt. Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a discharge voucher issued by an insured party, after accepting a settlement amount, bars them from later raising a dispute and invoking arbitration. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: United India

Supreme Court Upholds Discharge Voucher in Insurance Claim Dispute: United India Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Antique Art Exports Pvt. Ltd. (28 March 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Clause 59 in construction contracts: K. Marappan vs. The Superintending Engineer (27 March 2019)

March 27, 2019 / Arbitration Act, 1940, Arbitration Act, 1940 with Section 15, Arbitration Act, 1940 with Section 30, Arbitration Act, 1940 with Section 33, Construction Contracts, Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 70, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Ranjan Gogoi, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Date of the Judgment: 27 March 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 263 Judges: Ranjan Gogoi, CJI, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J., K.M. Joseph, J. Can a contractor claim compensation for additional expenses incurred due to unforeseen circumstances during a project, even if the contract has a clause limiting such claims? The Supreme Court of India addressed this

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Clause 59 in construction contracts: K. Marappan vs. The Superintending Engineer (27 March 2019) Read Post »