The Supreme Court of India has recently reiterated that there should be minimal judicial interference in the execution of foreign awards under §48(2) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996.

A constitutional bench of the Supreme Court of India ("SC") has held that there shall be no automatic vacation of stay orders granted by a High Court ("HC"), reversing the earlier position expressed in a 3-judge SC decision in Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited & Anr v Central Bureau of Investigation1 ("Asian Resurfacing")

The Bombay High Court has held that the mere institution of criminal proceedings will not render a dispute non-arbitrable.

A 7 – judge bench of the Supreme Court held that deficiency in stamping is a curable defect, and an arbitral tribunal is empowered to adjudicate on such objections. Tuli & Co has summarised the Supreme Court’s judgment on “Re Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements Under The Arbitration And Conciliation Act 1996 And The Indian Stamp Act 1899”.

The Supreme Court has held that §238 of the Insolvency Act overrides the Electricity Act, and that government and operational debts rank lower in priority than sums owed to unsecured financial creditors.

The Delhi High Court has held that the jurisdiction of a Court hearing a challenge under §34 of the Arbitration Act is limited.

The High Court of Delhi has held that the writ petition remedy under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is only available against orders passed by an Arbitral Tribunal in exceptional circumstances.

The Delhi High Court has recently invoked the "group of companies" doctrine and referred the disputes between a lender and borrower (as well as the borrower's sister concerns) to arbitration.

The Bombay High Court has held that a clause which contains the words “may be referred to arbitration” takes away from the mandatory and binding nature of an arbitration agreement.

The Bombay High Court has passed a judgment holding that the communications between a lawyer and client are privileged and cannot be disclosed to a third party without their express consent.…

The Bombay High Court has ruled that an award that relies on documents produced after the conclusion of arguments is patently illegal.…

The Delhi High Court has held that an arbitration clause in an earlier agreement remains binding on the parties even after they enter into subsequent agreements which do not contain an arbitration clause.

The Calcutta High Court has held that an arbitration clause must be invoked before approaching the Court for the appointment of an arbitrator.…

The Supreme Court has held that the procedural rigours of Order 38 Rule 5 (attachment prior to judgment) of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 are not strictly applicable while deciding a pre-arbitration 9 Petition to secure the amount in dispute.…

The Calcutta High Court has held that a contractual clause stipulating that parties should make "every effort" to arbitrate constitutes a valid arbitration clause…

The Bombay High Court has recently held that if a place is designated as the venue” at which the arbitration proceeding shall be held in its entirety, then that venue is implicitly also the seat” of the arbitration proceedings

The Supreme Court has recently held that if challenges under §34 §37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 and are successful, then the Court cannot modify the award but only set aside the award and remand the matter back to the Tribunal

A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court has set aside an arbitral tribunal's 16 order on the ground that it failed to consider the applicability of the "group of companies" doctrine…

The Delhi High Court has held that an order passed by an arbitral tribunal pursuant to the matter being remitted back to it cannot be treated as a fresh arbitral award

The Delhi High Court has held that an order passed by an arbitral tribunal pursuant to the matter being remitted back to it cannot be treated as a fresh arbitral awardhe Supreme Court has dismissed a writ petition seeking the equal treatment of a “decree holder” with a “financial creditor”.…

The Telangana High Court has held that the enforcement of an arbitral award should be as per §42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996.…

The Gujrat High Court has held that the insured cannot invoke arbitration after the execution of the discharge voucher without protest.…

The Karnataka High Court has held that contractually agreed upon dispute resolution steps by the parties must be followed prior to invocation of arbitration.…

The Karnataka High Court has recently held that the challenge to an international commercial arbitration award in a High Court not having ordinary original civil jurisdiction is to be considered by the Commercial Division of that High Court, and has directed that a Commercial Division be setup for this purpose.

A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court examining the 'group of companies' doctrine has referred the question of its correctness and application to a larger Bench.…

The Supreme Court had refused to interfere with an NCLAT decision holding that the NCLT has jurisdiction to entertain insolvency proceedings against a personal guarantor even if the company on behalf of whom the guarantee was issued is not undergoing CIRP or liquidation.…

The Division Bench of the of Kerala High Court has held that the cause of action to initiate arbitration upon a clear and unequivocal denial of a right asserted by one party.

The Delhi High Court has held that arbitral tribunal can interpret the terms of a contract, but it cannot re-work the contractual bargain struck between parties.

The Supreme Court has held that appeals against the NCDRC’s appellate orders are maintainable in High Courts through a Writ Petition.…

The Chhattisgarh High Court has held that a claimant must exhaust any contractually specified dispute resolution mechanism leading up to arbitration before seeking a reference to arbitration…

Insolvency Proceedings Cannot Be Commenced Against The Legal Heirs Of A Personal Guarantor Under The Insolvency And Bankruptcy Code 2016: Bank Of Baroda, Stressed Asset Management Branch (Samb) V Ms Divya Jalan, Legal Heir Of Personal Guarantor Late Sandeep Kumar Jalan1…

In exercise of its powers under §94 and §101(2)(zg) the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (Act), the Central Government notified the Consumer Protection (Direct Selling) Rules 2021 (Rules) on 28 December 2021…

§34(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 gives the Court discretion, and if requested by a party, to refer an award back to the Tribunal because of, inter alia, a lack of reasoning or gaps in the reasoning. The Supreme Court of India has held that the Court cannot exercise the §34(4) discretion where there is an absence of a finding on an issue before the Tribunal…

The Supreme Court has held that the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCALT) does not have the jurisdiction or power to condone a delay exceeding 15 days in any appeal field against a decision of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT)…

The Supreme Court has held that a Letter of Intent (LOI) cannot be construed as a binding contract unless an intention to bind is clear from its terms and the conduct of the parties…

The Calcutta High Court has held that an award holder's claim against an award debtor will be extinguished once the latter's Resolution Plan (RP) is approved, if the award holder has not pressed his claim during Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). The award debtor challenged the Arbitral Award under 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996…

In March 2020, the Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of the impact of the Covid-19 restrictions on compliance with limitation periods, and the led to Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No 3 of 2020. The Supreme Courts order of 23 March 2020 “extended” limitation periods from 15 March 2020 until further orders

The Supreme Court has recently ruled that two Indian parties can arbitrate outside India and the resulting award will be valid and enforceable in India. Disputes arose between the parties under an agreement for the purchase of convertors. A settlement agreement was executed which provided for ICC arbitration with Zurich as the seat of arbitration…

According to §18 of the Limitation Act 1963, an acknowledgment of liability in writing before the expiry of the limitation period will reset the limitation clock to the date of the acknowledgment. The Supreme Court has held the entries in the books of account of a company, including a balance sheet, can amount to the acknowledgement of a debt and so reset the limitation period under §18…

The Supreme Court has ruled on the “seat and venue” of an arbitration, and the impact that a change in venue has upon the seat and the subsequent challenge proceedings. Arbitration commenced under a purchase order which named Jaipur as the venue, but the parties agreed to hold the proceedings at Ahmedabad…

Nothing the difficulties that can be faced in enforcing judgements, the Supreme Court has issued directions for enforcement proceedings to be expedited. In a property related suit, the judgement debtors obstructed enforcement by creating conflicting rights over the property, filing objections, appeals, criminal proceedings, etc…

16 of the Act provides that a Tribunal is empowered to decide questions relating to its own jurisdictions. 16(5) of the Act provides that a Tribunal “shall decide on a plea” regarding its jurisdictions, but does not say when jurisdictional objections have to be decided, and the timing issue has recently been clarified by the Delhi High Court

A Division Bench of the Madras High Court has set out the duties of a Single Judge considering the validity of an unreasoned arbitral award following a challenge to the award §34 of the Arbitration & Convilitation Act 1996. The first instance Single Judge upheld an arbitration award containing concise reasons based on an admission made by one of the parties…

In March 2020, the Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of the impact of the Covid-19 restrictions on compliance with limitation periods, and this led to Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No 3 of 2020. The Supreme Court's order of 23 March 2020 "extended" limitation periods from 15 March 2020 until further orders. The Supreme Court periodically revisited its order and largely kept the extension in place, until now

§34 of the Act permits a challenge to an arbitral award on limited grounds within 3 months from the date on which the award is received. A 30 day extension can be sought on showing "sufficient cause". 37(1)(c) permits an appeal from orders "setting aside or refusing to set aside" an award under §34. In BGS SGS Soma, the Supreme Court had held that an order condoning delay in filing a 34 challenge is a preliminary order and so not appealable

The Supreme Court of India has confirmed that the consumer fora has the power under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 to set aside one-sided terms in contracts if this amounts to an unfair trade practice. Facts: The plaintiff was developing a residential project called The Corridors in Gurgaon. Several purchasers filed complaints before the National Commission seeking a refund of the instalments they had paid, plus interest, because the plaintiff had failed to give possession within…

The Delhi High Court has clarified that:
(i) stamp duty is only to be paid on an arbitral award at the time of enforcement, and
(ii) a photocopy of an award is not an instrument under the Indian Stamp Act 1899, and therefore cannot be impounded…

Because of deficiency in service and misleading ads, the Kerala District Commission has fined the manufacturer of a hair growth cream and the cream's brand ambassador. The store owner that sold the cream has been directed to pay the costs of the proceedings to the Complainant

The Supreme Court has held that the non-payment or underpayment of stamp duty does not invalidate an arbitration agreement contained in a contract, but because of a conflict with an earlier Supreme Court judgment, the question has been referred to a larger bench

In Noy Vallesina, the Supreme Court has ruled that even under the pre-BALCO regime, if parties have agreed that the seat of arbitration will be outside India, then Part – I of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 will not be applicable…