High Court Doesn't Qualify As Civil Court Under Section 2(1)(e) Of Arbitration Act, Has Jurisdiction Under Section 11(6): Punjab And Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench of Justice Jagmohan Bansal has held that the High Court itself does not qualify as a Civil Court under Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Consequently, the High Court held that it has jurisdiction under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, which grants it authority where the principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction would have the power to address the issues that are subject to arbitration, if those issues were...

Arbitration Clause In Partnership Firm's Agreement Remains Valid If Assets And Liabilities Transferred To Private Limited Company: Punjab And Haryana High Court

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench of Justice Jagmohan Bansal has held that an arbitration clause in a partnership firm's agreement remains valid if a private limited company has taken over all the firm's assets and liabilities. The High Court held that this arrangement can be inferred from both the dissolution deed of the partnership firm and in the company's Memorandum of Association and Articles of Association. Brief Facts: Shanker Printing Mills (Applicant) initially...

Arbitral Award Can Be Enforced Anywhere In Country Where Decree Is Executable: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Dwarka Dhish Bansal has held that an award could be enforced through its execution in any location within the country where the decree could be executed. The High Court held that it is unnecessary to obtain a transfer of the decree from the Court that had jurisdiction over the arbitral proceedings. Brief Facts: Mahindra & Mahindra Financial Services Limited (the Applicant), who held the decree, filed a civil revision...

Arbitration Cases Monthly Digest: July 2024

Supreme Court Avoid Bulky Pleadings & Lengthy Submissions In Arbitration Appeals : Supreme Court To Advocates Case Title: Bombay Slum Redevelopment Corporation Private Limited Versus Samir Narain Bhojwani Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 445 Expressing displeasure over the filing of bulky and lengthy submissions in the arbitral proceedings, the Supreme Court on Monday (July 8) called upon the Bar to urge only the legally permissible grounds in the arbitration proceedings...

Non-Response Can't Be Presumed As Consent For Appointment Of Arbitrator: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court bench of J. C.Hari Shankar has held that consent requires consensus ad idem and there must be positive consent present from the petitioner side with respect to the appointment of an arbitrator. If such consent is absent, the appointment becomes unilateral and ex facie illegal. The court has held that there was no consent by the petitioner with respect to the appointment of Mr. Kasana as the Arbitrator. The respondent by merely putting a cautionary caveat in...

How To Determine Conversion Of Arbitral Award In Foreign Currency To Indian Currency? Supreme Court Explains

In a significant judgment relating to International Commercial Arbitration, the Supreme Court has decided the two important questions on the enforcement of an arbitral award expressed in foreign currency to Indian Currency.The two questions that appeared for the Court's consideration were:Firstly, what is the correct and appropriate date to determine the foreign exchange rate for converting the award amount expressed in foreign currency to Indian rupees? The Court said that the relevant date...

Arbitration | Impermissible For Arbitral Tribunal Or Courts To Grant Interest Upon Interest Under 1940 Act : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday (Aug. 7) held that an Arbitral Tribunal is not empowered to grant interest upon interest while passing an arbitral award as the Arbitration Act, 1940 does not specifically provide for the grant of interest on interest. “In the light of the above legal provisions and the case law on the subject, it is evident that ordinarily courts are not supposed to grant interest on interest except where it has been specifically provided under the statute or where there is...

Arbitral Tribunal First To Adjudge Non-Arbitrability Of Dispute And Ground Of Res-Judicata, Courts Can Have Second Look After Award: Rajasthan HC

The bench of Justice Nupur Bhati at the Rajasthan High Court accepted an application filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking appointment of an arbitrator and observed that the issue of non-arbitrability of a dispute under an arbitration agreement falls under the domain of the arbitral tribunal in the first instance and the courts have the power to only “second look” after passing of the arbitral award. The Court also opined that the question regarding the...

Writ Petition Can't Be Entertained Against Every Interlocutory Order Issued By Arbitral Tribunal: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula has held that the scope of judicial interference under Article 226 is limited when challenging an Arbitral Tribunal's order concerning the conduct of arbitration proceedings. The bench held that a writ petition cannot be entertained against every interlocutory order related to case management. Such orders fall within the Arbitral Tribunal's discretion and authority which includes decisions on matters like summoning witnesses and...

Principles Of Equity And Fairness Not Applicable To Commercial Matters, Relief Is Governed By Contract: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice C Hari Shankar has held that commerce is devoid of equity. The bench held that commercial transactions are driven by a harsh reality, and the principle of universal brotherhood does not extend to commercial dealings. In these transactions, there is no obligation on the arbitrator for fairness, kindness, or equity, and no court can mandate such qualities. The bench noted that while there might be a limited expectation of fairness in transactions...

Arbitral Tribunal's Decision To Award Damages For Loss Of Profit Is Patently Illegal If It Contradicts Contract: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju has held that an Arbitral Tribunal's decision to award damages for loss of profit is vitiated by patent illegality if it contradicts the express terms of the agreement between the parties. The bench held that: “It is essential to maintain the bargain entered into between the parties. The parties agreed that they would not be liable for (i) any indirect, special, or consequential loss or...

Settlement Arising From Contract Containing Arbitration Clause Must Be Resolved Through Arbitration: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court division bench of Justice Anu Sivaraman and Justice Anant Ramanath Hegde has held that the right to enforce the settlement has to be through arbitration as the alleged settlement is in respect of a transaction arising from the contract which contained an arbitration clause. Brief Facts: M/s S P Sai Technologies (Respondent) filed a suit for recovery of money, and M/s Akshaya Private Limited (Appellant) contested the jurisdiction of the court by filing an...