Pendente Lite And Future Interest Can't Be Included In The 'Aggregate Value Of Claim And Counterclaims' U/S 12 Of Commercial Courts Act: Delhi High Court

ThePendente Lite And Future Interest Can't Be Included In The 'Aggregate Value Of Claim And Counterclaims' U/S 12 Of Commercial Courts Act: Delhi High Court has held that to determine the pecuniary jurisdiction of the Court to deal with a challenge petition under Section 34 of the A&C Act, the value of the pendente lite and future interest cannot be included in the aggregate value of the claims and counter-claims to determine the 'Specified Value' as provided under Section 12 of the...

Arbitral Award Can't Be Challenged On Ground Of Bias Of Arbitrator If No Challenge Was Made During Arbitral Proceedings: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that an arbitral award cannot be challenged on the ground of bias of arbitrator if no challenge to bias was made during the pendency of arbitral proceedings. The bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh held that a party that has fully participated in the arbitral proceedings without raising any challenge to the jurisdiction of the tribunal on ground of bias, cannot challenge the award directly under Section 34 of the A&C Act. The Court held that in an...

Dispute Can't Be Referred To Arbitration In Absence Of An Arbitration Agreement Under Article 226 Of Constitution: Patna High Court

The High Court of Patna has held that no dispute can be referred to arbitration by a Court exercising powers under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution when there is no agreement between the parties.The bench of Justice Partha Sarthy held that the remedy of arbitration is the creature of a contract and the same cannot be utilised in absence of a written agreement between the parties as provided under Section 7 of the A&C Act. FactsThe relevant background of the case involves the...

Mere Negotiations Will Not Postpone The Cause Of Action For Appointment Of An Arbitrator: Telangana High Court

The High Court of Telangana has held that mere negotiations between the parties related to the dispute would not delay the cause of action for the purpose of limitation for the appointment of the arbitrator.The bench of Justice C.V. Bhaskar Reddy dismissed an application for the appointment of an arbitrator wherein the cause of action accrued more than 7 years before the date of the application. FactsThe parties entered into two development agreements dated 07.12.2012. In terms of the agreement,...

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: 1st January – 7th January

Supreme Court Arbitral Awards Cannot Be Modified Under Sections 34 & 37 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act : Supreme Court Case Title: S.V. Samudram v. State of Karnataka Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 14 The Supreme Court has reiterated the settled position of law that any attempt to “modify an award” while adjudicating Sections 34 and 37 petitions is not permissible under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Division Bench of Supreme Court comprising...

Arbitration Act | Section 9 Order By Subordinate Judge Acting As Commercial Court Appealable Before Commercial Appellate Court, Not HC: Kerala HC

The Kerala High Court recently held that an order passed by a Subordinate Judge's Court acting as a Commercial Court under a Government notification, would be appealable only before the concerned Commercial Appellate Court as per Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, and not before the High Court, as per the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Act, 1996). The Court in this case was seized of an appeal against an order passed by the Subordinate Court under Section 9 of the Act,...

Arbitral Tribunal Can Award Damages For Delay Attributable To Employer Even When The Agreement Provides For The Extension Of Time As The Only Remedy To The Contractor: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that the Arbitral tribunal can award monetary compensation as damages for the delay attributable to employer even when the agreement provides for the extension of time as the only remedy to the contractor. The bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held that the tribunal cannot deny damages on the ground that the agreement provides only for extension of time, especially when the agreement has already been terminated by the employer and there is no...

A Clause That Restricts The Right Of The Contractor To Seek Damages For Delay Attributable To The Employer Is Against Public Policy: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that a clause that restricts the right of the contractor to seek damages for delay attributable to the employer is against public policy in terms of Section 23 of the Indian Contract Act. The bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held a clause that restricts the right of the aggrieved party to claim damages is prohibitionary in nature and against the fundamental policy of Indian Law. It held that such a clause is no fetter on the power of the arbitral...

Court Under Section 34 Of The A&C Act Can Partially Set Aside The Award: Delhi High Court Reiterates

The High Court of Delhi has held that a Court exercising powers under Section 34 of the A&C Act can sever an offending portion of the arbitral award. It held that such exercise of power amounts to partial setting aside of the award and not a modification. The bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh explained that modification would be when the court modifies/changes the damages awarded, modifies the interest rate, etc. But mere setting aside of unconnected/independent findings of the...

Annual Digest of Arbitration Cases : 2023 (Part -II)

Supreme Court Will The Mandate Of The Tribunal Terminate Under Section 29A Unless Extended During Its Subsistence? Supreme Court To Examine The Supreme Court is set to examine an important issue related to the arbitration law that whether the mandate of the tribunal terminates upon the expiry of the time provided under Section 29A unless extended during its subsistence. The bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and S.V.N. Bhatti has issued notice in an SLP filed against the order of the...

Arbitral Tribunal Can Award Damages For Delay By Employer Even In Absence Of Any Clause In Agreement : Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that the Arbitral tribunal can award monetary compensation as damages for the delay attributable to employer even when the agreement provides for the extension of time as the only remedy to the contractor. The bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held that the tribunal cannot deny damages on the ground that the agreement provides only for extension of time, especially when the agreement has already been terminated by the employer and there is no...

Arbitral Tribunal Can Go Beyond To Grant Relief To Aggrieved Party When Contract Illegally Restricts Remedies : Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that an Arbitral Tribunal can transgress the boundaries of the contract to grant relief to aggrieved party when the contract illegally restricts or does not provide for sufficient remedies. The bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh held that in a situation which is not anticipated in the agreement, the tribunal can transgress the boundaries of the agreement and grant relief to the aggrieved party which it is rightfully entitled to. It held that the...