Arbitration Act
Arbitrator cannot be impleaded in proceedings under S. 36(2) of A&C Act until prima facie case of fraud/corruption is established: Calcutta HC
The award debtor’s counsel contended that the bias is an element of fraud, and to adjudicate the allegations of fraud and/or bias, the member concerned of the arbitral tribunal is required to be impleaded in the proceedings under Section 34 and Section 36(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
To Register or not to Register? — MSMEs and Arbitration Act
by Anirudh Goyal* and Jaspreet Singh**
Breakdown of SC’s 4:1 Verdict on Court’s limited power to modify Arbitral Awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act
The present controversy arose because the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, does not expressly empower courts to modify or vary an arbitral award, and Section 34 of the 1996 Act only confers upon courts the power to set aside an award.
Courts have limited power to modify arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act: Supreme Court by 4:1 majority
Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides the legal framework for challenging an arbitral award before a court, while Section 37 governs appeals against specific orders passed under the Act, including those made under Section 34.
One Court to Rule Them All? Jurisdictional Overlap in Post-Award Enforcement Regime under the Arbitration Act
by Vasanth Rajasekaran* and Harshvardhan Korada**
Litigation, Integrity, and the Future of Law: In conversation with Senior Advocate Malvika Trivedi
Interviewed by Shaleen Bareja
‘Entirely based on false foundation’; Bombay HC dismisses condonation of delay application by National Highway Division in arbitration appeal
“It is now trite law that State agencies cannot hide behind the conventional excuse of bureaucratic delays and inefficiency in the State’s capacity, to condone delays.”
Arbitration in Government Contracts: Party Autonomy Versus Public Policy
by Vasanth Rajasekaran* and Harshvardhan Korada**
SC stresses on judicial restraint in arbitration matters; sets aside HC’s order granting opportunity for cross-examination despite Arbitral Tribunal’s rejection
The Court examined the question that whether the High Court correctly exercised its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 in granting the respondent one more opportunity to cross-examine the appellant’s witness, despite the Arbitral Tribunal rejected such a prayer.
Arbitration in 2024: Landmark Rulings and Key Takeaways
From the High Court’s clarification of the definition of “court” under the Arbitration Act to the Supreme Court’s recommendation for Parliament to introduce an amendment defining a specific limitation period for the appointment of arbitrators, several key rulings have shaped the arbitration landscape. This piece highlights the notable arbitration cases of 2024.
Dispute relating to infringement of copyright against a particular person is arbitrable: Orissa High Court reiterates
The Court relied on Vidya Drolia v. Durga Trading Corpn., (2019) 20 SCC 406., wherein it was held that a claim for infringement of copyright against a particular person is arbitrable, though in some manner the arbitrator would examine the right to copyright, a right in rem.
Disputes relating to non-payment of wages & termination order within Industrial Tribunal’s jurisdiction; SC quashes arbitrator’s appointment
“Jurisdiction of the Industrial Court is also to the exclusion of the civil courts and is not arbitrable.”
Awards rendered by MSME Council can be challenged under Section 34 of A&C Act and not under Art. 226: Orissa High Court
In the matter at hand, the appellant contended that the Council’s award ought to have been interfered with under Article 226/227 of the Constitution, as there was no conciliation in accordance with the procedure prescribed, a condition precedent for initiation of arbitration proceeding under Section 18 (3) of the MSMED Act.
2024 SCC Vol. 9 Part 3
Arbitration Act, 1940 — S. 29 — Interest on interest or compound interest: Post award interest on interest awarded is not grantable
‘Necessary ingredients of Sec. 11(6) clearly exist’; Delhi HC appoints Arbitrator to resolve dispute between Yuvraj Singh and real estate developer for claim of Rs. 1.38 Crores
“Deletion of party is an issue to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal, it cannot be looked into by the Court under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act”
‘Situation not emergent to justify parallel adjudication by Court’: Delhi High Court dismisses Section 9 Arbitration petition due to Lack of Urgency
“When the Arbitral Tribunal is in seisin of disputes between parties, there is the pernicious possibility of any observation being made by the Court influencing the proceedings before the Arbitral Tribunal”
2024 SCC Vol. 6 Part 1
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 11 & 8 and 16 r/w S. 7: Law clarified on harmonious construction of Arbitration