New Claim For Enhancement Of Compensation From NHAI Based On Subsequent Change Of Land Use ; Barred By Limitation : Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that the cause of action for referring the dispute to arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 arises on the date of the determination of the amount of compensation by the competent authority under Section 3G(1) of the Act. The bench of Justice Milind Ramesh Phadke held that though there is no period of limitation provided for referring the dispute to arbitrator under the said Section, however, it is governed by the residuary clause...

Court Cannot Appoint Arbitrator Under Section 11 Of The A&C Act When The Dispute Is Covered Under MSMED Act: Gujarat HC Reiterates

The High Court of Gujarat has reiterated that the petition under Section 11 of the A&C Act for the appointment of the arbitrator by the Court would not be maintainable if the dispute is covered under the MSMED Act, 2006 and the provisions of the act are invoked. The bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav followed a line of earlier precents wherein the High Court has held that the provisions of MSMED Act prevail over the A&C Act and the resolution of dispute covered under the MSMED Act has to be...

Interim Relief Under The A&C Act Obtained Without Disclosing Material Evidence, Calcutta High Court Imposes Cost Of Rs. 50 Thousand On Each Petitioner

The High Court of Calcutta has held that a party approaching the Court for relief must do so with clean hands and is under an obligation to disclose all material facts that have bearing on the adjudication of the issues in the case.The bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf held that the doors of justice would be closed for litigants approaching the court with a case built on falsehood, fraudulent concealment or suppression of material facts. The Court recalled its earlier order wherein it had...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round- Up: 26 June To 2 July 2023

Bombay High Court:Absence Of A Specific Clause Under GAFTA Arbitration Rules Doesn’t Bar Arbitrator From Deciding The Challenge Made To Its Jurisdiction: Bombay High CourtCase Title: Arbaza Alimentos Ltda vs MAC Impex and othersThe Bombay High Court has reiterated that a general reference to a standard form of contract would be enough for incorporation of an arbitration clause. The court was dealing with a petition seeking execution of a foreign arbitral award passed in the arbitral proceedings...

2019 Amendment To Section 29A Of The Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 Is Procedural In Nature; Applies To All Pending Arbitrations: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that 2019 Amendment to Section 29A of the A&C Act is procedural in nature and would apply to all arbitrations that were pending on the date of its coming into force. By way of the amendment, the time limit of 12 months for rendering an award was to be calculated from the date of the completion of proceedings and not from the date when the arbitrator entered reference as provided under the unamended Section. The bench of Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhani extended...

Venue Would Be The ‘Seat’ Of Arbitration When There Is No Significant Contrary Indicia Present In The Agreement: Calcutta High Court

The High Court of Calcutta has held that venue would be the seat of arbitration when the agreement between the parties contains no significant contrary indicia.The bench of Justice Krishna Rao also held that merely because the arbitration agreement does not clearly provide for the law governing the arbitration, it would not make the agreement ambiguous, vague or uncertain so to allow refusal of reference to arbitration under Section 45 of the Act. The Court held that judicial interference under...

Absence Of A Specific Clause Under GAFTA Arbitration Rules Doesn’t Bar Arbitrator From Deciding The Challenge Made To Its Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has reiterated that a general reference to a standard form of contract would be enough for incorporation of an arbitration clause. The court was dealing with a petition seeking execution of a foreign arbitral award passed in the arbitral proceedings conducted under the ‘Grain and Feed Trade Association (GAFTA) Simple Disputes Arbitration Rules No.126.’The bench of Justice Manish Pitale observed that the contract between the parties was executed as per the ‘Global Pulse...

Examining The Ambiguities Surrounding Finality Of Interim Awards

On June 14, 2023, the Ministry of Law and Justice constituted an expert committee for evaluating the working of the Arbitration law in India, examine its strengths and weaknesses, and recommend the reforms in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”). This has given us an opportunity to look into the loopholes of the Indian arbitral ecosystem and work upon them. One such controversial and unsettled issue is the issue relating to interim awards. An arbitral award as defined...

Meghalaya High Court Imposes ₹10L Cost On PWD For Unnecessary Litigation, Says "Voluminous Tomes" Won't Dissuade Judges From Looking Deep

The Meghalaya High Court while upholding an arbitral award has ordered the Public Works Department (National Highway) to pay a contractor Rs. 10 lakh over and above the award amount, saying that PWD put the contractor through unnecessary litigation."This is a complete waste of time and a reckless exercise undertaken by an irresponsible appellant...It has become fashionable, particularly for public sector undertakings and government litigants, to throw sheafs of paper at the court and believe...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round- Up: 19 June To 25 June 2023

High Courts:Calcutta High Court:S. 8 Application Filed Along With The Written Statement In Suit; Can’t Be Presumed That Party Waived Its Right To Refer Dispute For Arbitration: Calcutta High Court ReiteratesCase Title: Nemai Chandra Roy Karmakar alias Nemai Roy vs Sarada ConstructionThe Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is the duty of the defendant to file the application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking arbitral reference, before filing the first...

S. 8 Application Filed Along With The Written Statement In Suit; Can’t Be Presumed That Party Waived Its Right To Refer Dispute For Arbitration: Calcutta High Court Reiterates

The Calcutta High Court has ruled that it is the duty of the defendant to file the application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeking arbitral reference, before filing the first statement in a suit. However, the court remarked that filing of a Section 8 application along with the written statement cannot lead to any presumption that the defendant has waived its right of referring the dispute for arbitration.The bench of Justice Bibhas Ranjan De further held that a...

Order Under S. 16 Of A&C Act Can Be Challenged Under Article 227 Only On Exceptional Circumstances: Calcutta High Court Reiterates

The Calcutta High Court has reiterated that the remedy under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order of the Arbitral Tribunal rejecting the challenge to its jurisdiction under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), can be invoked only on ground of the Arbitrator’s patent lack in inherent jurisdiction, or exceptional circumstances, or ‘bad faith’ on part of the other party.The bench of Justice Bivas Pattanayak made the observation while...