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 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 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 settles the issue of waiver of objection in Arbitration: Quippo Construction Equipment Ltd. vs. Janardan Nirman Pvt. Ltd. (29 April 2020)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 16, Arbitration Law with Section 4, Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Award: Waiver of Objections on Venue Date of the Judgment: 29 April 2020 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 2378 of 2020 (arising out of SLP (C) No. 11011 of 2019) Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J. and Vineet Saran, J. Can a party object to the venue of arbitration after participating in the

Supreme Court settles the issue of waiver of objection in Arbitration: Quippo Construction Equipment Ltd. vs. Janardan Nirman Pvt. Ltd. (29 April 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies execution of arbitration award for land price fixation: Rajasthan Udyog vs. Hindustan Engineering (2020) INSC 257

/ Arbitration Act, 1940 with Section 17, Arbitration Award Execution, Arbitration Law, Code of Civil Procedure, Code of Civil Procedure with Order XXIII Rule 1, Contract Law, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 23, Judges, Specific Performance, Uday Umesh Lalit, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court clarifies execution of arbitration award for land price fixation: Rajasthan Udyog vs. Hindustan Engineering (2020) INSC 257 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitration award that determines compensation for land under an agreement for sale can be executed as a suit for specific performance when the arbitration was only for price fixation. CASE TYPE: Arbitration

Supreme Court clarifies execution of arbitration award for land price fixation: Rajasthan Udyog vs. Hindustan Engineering (2020) INSC 257 Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the forum for recovery of dues in nationalized textile undertakings: UCO Bank vs. National Textile Corporation Ltd. (2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Arbitration Law, Debt Recovery, Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, Permanent Machinery of Arbitrators (PMA), R. Banumathi, Textile Law, Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995, Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995 with Section 4(2), Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995 with Section 4(5)

Supreme Court clarifies the forum for recovery of dues in nationalized textile undertakings: UCO Bank vs. National Textile Corporation Ltd. (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the appropriate forum for resolving disputes regarding liabilities of a nationalized textile undertaking. CASE TYPE: Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Case Name: UCO Bank vs. National Textile Corporation Ltd. & Anr. Judgment Date:

Supreme Court clarifies the forum for recovery of dues in nationalized textile undertakings: UCO Bank vs. National Textile Corporation Ltd. (2020) Read Post »

Arbitration Clause in Insufficiently Stamped Lease Deed: Supreme Court Rules on Enforceability

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, B.R. Gavai, Contract Law, Judges, Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, Lease Deed, S.A. Bobde, Section 33, Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, Section 34, Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, Surya Kant

Supreme Court on Arbitration and Stamp Duty: Dharmaratnakara Rai Bahadur Arcot Narainswamy Mudaliar Chattram & Ors. vs. M/S Bhaskar Raju & Brothers & Ors. (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Enforceability of an arbitration clause in a lease deed that is not sufficiently stamped under the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: M/S Dharmaratnakara

Arbitration Clause in Insufficiently Stamped Lease Deed: Supreme Court Rules on Enforceability Read Post »

Supreme Court Modifies Arbitral Award on Construction Contract: Chandigarh Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Punjab (2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Arbitral Award, Arbitration Act, 1940, Arbitration Law, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 39, Contract Law with Clause 63, Contractual Interpretation, Judges, R. Banumathi, Reasoned Awards

Supreme Court Modifies Arbitral Award on Construction Contract: Chandigarh Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Punjab (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitrator’s award can be sustained if it does not provide reasons for its conclusions, especially when the contract requires it. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Chandigarh Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. State

Supreme Court Modifies Arbitral Award on Construction Contract: Chandigarh Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Punjab (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation Ratio in Housing Dispute: Chandigarh Housing Board vs. Parasvanath Developers (2019)

/ Arbitration Law, Consumer Law, Consumer Rights, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 9, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, R. Subhash Reddy, Real Estate Disputes, Tripartite Agreement

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation Ratio in Housing Dispute: Chandigarh Housing Board vs. Parasvanath Developers (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Liability for compensation and refund in a failed real estate project. CASE TYPE: Consumer. Case Name: Chandigarh Housing Board vs. M/s. Parasvanath Developers Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. [Judgment Date]: 17 December 2019 Date of the Judgment: 17 December

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation Ratio in Housing Dispute: Chandigarh Housing Board vs. Parasvanath Developers (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies appointment of arbitrators in railway contracts: Central Organisation for Railway Electrification vs. M/S ECI-SPIC-SMO-MCML (JV) (17 December 2019)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Appointment of Arbitrator, Arbitration Clause, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 11, Arbitration Law with Section 12(5), Contract Law, General Conditions of Contract, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, R. Banumathi

Supreme Court on Appointment of Arbitrators in Railway Contracts: Central Organisation for Railway Electrification vs. M/S ECI-SPIC-SMO-MCML (JV) (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an independent arbitrator can be appointed by the High Court when the contract specifies a panel of arbitrators. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Central Organisation for Railway Electrification vs. M/S ECI-SPIC-SMO-MCML (JV)

Supreme Court clarifies appointment of arbitrators in railway contracts: Central Organisation for Railway Electrification vs. M/S ECI-SPIC-SMO-MCML (JV) (17 December 2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top