The Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996

5th Apr, 2018

Plea of lack of jurisdiction of Arbitral Tribunal can be raised under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act for the first time even if not raised earlier under Section 16 in the statement of defence.

In a recent judgment, the Apex Court ruled that an objection as to jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal can be raised in a petition under Section 34 for the first time even if omitted to […]
4th Apr, 2018

Limitation period commences for the party making an application for setting aside Arbitration Award from the date of signed copy of the Award being delivered to it.

In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court ruled and reiterated that limitation period prescribed under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act would commence only from the date of the signed copy of the […]
3rd Apr, 2018

Applications which causally explain the cause of delay, without explaining each day’s delay is liable to be dismissed.

Each day’s delay has to be properly explained either for filing or for refiling. Where delay is attempted to be explained casually and no effort has been made to explain each day’s delay, application are […]
11th May, 2017

Interim orders cannot be granted in Arbitration proceedings where claim cannot be specifically enforced

Bombay High Court in the matter of B E Billimoira and Company Vs Mahindra Bebanco Developers Limited; Commercial Arbitration Petition (Ldg) No. 29 of 2017 held no interim order can be passed by Court/Arbitrator under […]
2nd May, 2017

Parties by an Agreement can confer jurisdiction upon a Court in Arbitration matters

Supreme Court in the matter of Indus Mobile Vs. Datawind Innovations; Civil appeal no. 5370-5371/2017 in a landmark judgment has modified the understanding of law with regard to jurisdiction of Court. Age old law that […]
17th Mar, 2017

Limitation Act applies to Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996

Delhi High Court in the matter of Jammu and Kashmir State Power Development Corporation Vs K J M C Global Market; FAO (OS) 263/2016 held It is now well settled that the provisions of the […]
11th Feb, 2017

Mandate of arbitrator shall be terminated where parties agree to terminate proceedings

Delhi High Court in a matter titled as Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd Vs. Deepak Cables (India) Limited; OMP (T)(COMM) 4/2017 decided on 25th January, 2017 held that under  14 (1)(b) of the Arbitration […]
1st Jan, 2017

Parties to an arbitration agreement are free to decide both procedural and substantive law #indianlaws

Parties (to the contract) in the present case intended to provide for two opportunities at resolving their disputes or differences. First was a settlement by arbitration in India (‘arbitration result’) and second was by arbitration […]
20th May, 2016

Application of Part I of the Arbitration Act, 1996 is excluded where seat of Arbitration is outside India #indianlaws

Where the parties choose a juridical seat of Arbitration outside India and provide that the law which governs Arbitration will be a law other than Indian law, part I of the Act would not have […]
10th Feb, 2016

Intent of Parties to Arbitration cannot be ignored relating to law governing Arbitration #indianlaws

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the parties are free to agree on application of three different laws governing their entire contract – (1) proper law of contract, (2) proper law of arbitration agreement […]
31st Oct, 2015

Courts not to appoint a substitute arbitrator only in cases of clear prohibition in the Agreement #indianlaws

Whenever parties agree for arbitration and even name a specific arbitrator with no specific provision for appointment of another arbitrator on the recusal/withdrawal of the said arbitrator, the said omission is made up by Section […]
2nd Jul, 2015

Court to act with caution and circumspection while deciding on plea of not invoking arbitration on the ground of contract being void or voidable

Court ought to act with caution and circumspection whilst examining the plea that the main contract is void or voidable. The Court ought to decline reference to arbitration only where the Court can reach the […]