Contractual Interpretation

Supreme Court Upholds Compound Interest in Arbitration, Dismisses State’s Appeal: UHL Power Company Ltd. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2022)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 31(7)(a), Arbitration Law with Section 34, Contract Law, Contractual Interpretation, Hima Kohli, Judges, Merger of Agreements, N.V. Ramana

Supreme Court Upholds Compound Interest in Arbitration, Dismisses State’s Appeal: UHL Power Company Ltd. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitral tribunal can award compound interest and whether a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) merges into an Implementation Agreement. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: UHL Power Company Ltd. vs. State of […]

Supreme Court Upholds Compound Interest in Arbitration, Dismisses State’s Appeal: UHL Power Company Ltd. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the distinction between a business license and a rent agreement in Mangala Waman Karandikar vs. Prakash Damodar Ranade (2021)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Contract Law, Contractual Interpretation, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 92, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 95, Judges, N.V. Ramana, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Clarifies Business License vs. Rent Agreement: Mangala Waman Karandikar vs. Prakash Damodar Ranade (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an agreement to run an existing business constitutes a license of the business itself or a lease of the premises where the business is located. CASE TYPE: Civil Law (Contractual Dispute) Case Name: Mangala Waman Karandikar

Supreme Court clarifies the distinction between a business license and a rent agreement in Mangala Waman Karandikar vs. Prakash Damodar Ranade (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitration Law Applicability in Cross-Border Contract Dispute: Punatsangchhu Hydroelectric Project vs. Larsen & Toubro (2021)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2013 (Bhutan), Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 11(6), Contract Law, Contractual Interpretation, Indu Malhotra, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitration Law Applicability in Cross-Border Contract Dispute: Punatsangchhu Hydroelectric Project vs. Larsen & Toubro (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Applicability of Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 versus Bhutan’s Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2013 in a contract with a clause specifying Indian law as a guide. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Case Name: Punatsangchhu – 1

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitration Law Applicability in Cross-Border Contract Dispute: Punatsangchhu Hydroelectric Project vs. Larsen & Toubro (2021) 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 Contractual Bar on Interest in Arbitration: Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. vs. THDC (2019)

/ A.K. Sikri, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 31(7)(a), Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 50, Contract Law with Clause 51, Contractual Interpretation, Judges, M. R. Shah, S. Abdul Nazeer

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Bar on Interest in Arbitration: Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. vs. THDC (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitrator can award interest when the contract between parties explicitly prohibits it. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. vs. Tehri Hydro Development Corporation India Ltd. Judgment Date: 07 February 2019 Date of the

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Bar on Interest in Arbitration: Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. vs. THDC (2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top