ARBITRATION
Limitation To Challenge Arbitral Award Starts On Postal Delivery To Party Not Email To Lawyer: Patna High Court
The Patna High Court has recently ruled that the limitation period to challenge an arbitral award starts only when the party itself receives a signed copy of the award by registered post, and not when a signed copy is merely received on the email of the party's lawyer. "Thus, a conjoint reading of sub-section (5) of Section 31 and sub-section (3) of Section 34 would make it clear that the reckoning point for computation of the period of limitation is the date on which the party making the...
LiveLawBiz Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: February 02 - February 08, 2026
NOMINAL INDEX Rajia Begum vs Barnali Mukherjee, 2026 LLBiz SC 36C Velusamy v K Indhera, 2026 LLBiz SC 39Eminent Colonizers Private Limited v Rajasthan Housing Board & Ors, 2026 LLBiz SC 48A2Z Infraservices Ltd and Anr v Quippo Infrastructure Ltd and Anr, 2026 LLBiz SC 42Avneet Soni v Kavita Agarwal, 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 108Union of India v Reliance Industries Ltd & Anr, 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 11Puri Constructions Pvt Ltd & Ors v Larsen & Toubro Ltd, 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 119Dusters...
Arbitral Award Not Invalid Though High Court Appointed Arbitrator Instead Of Supreme Court In ICA: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has refused to set aside a 2012 arbitral award after a shareholder argued that the arbitrator was wrongly appointed by the High Court instead of the Supreme Court in an international commercial arbitration. Rejecting the challenge, the court held that the Arbitration and Conciliation Act does not permit annulment of an award merely because of a dispute over which court appointed the arbitrator. "Section 34(2)(a)(v) does not contemplate the setting aside of an arbitral...
Arbitration Cases Monthly Digest: January 2026
SUPREME COURTAppellate Courts Cannot Disturb Arbitral Awards Merely To Permit A Different View, Supreme Court Reiterates Case Title : Jan De Nul Dredging India Pvt. Ltd. v. Tuticorin Port Trust Case Number : Civil Appeal No. 98 of 2026 Citation: 2026 LLBiz SC 15 The Supreme Court, recently, set aside a Madras High Court order that had deleted compensation awarded to a dredging contractor and reiterated that appellate courts cannot interfere with arbitral awards merely because they prefer a...
Non-Signatory Successor Company May Invoke Arbitration Clause After Merger: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court has recently held that a company that becomes the successor of an original contracting party pursuant to an NCLT-approved merger can invoke an arbitration clause even if it is not a signatory to the original agreement. Justice Shampa Sarkar made the observation on February 3 while hearing an application filed by Tata Capital Limited seeking appointment of an arbitrator in a dispute arising out of a loan agreement with a borrower. “In my prima facie view, even if the...
Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award Against Company Officials Without Impleading Companies
The Calcutta High Court has set aside an arbitral award after finding that it was passed against two officials of state-owned power companies instead of the companies that were parties to the arbitration agreement. A Division Bench of Justices Debangsu Basak and Md. Shabbar Rashidi held that the award, which fastened liability on the managing director of Bihar State Power Generation Company Limited and the chairman of Bihar State Power Holding Company Limited, could not be sustained since the...
Kerala High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award For Relying On Findings Of Set-Aside Award
The Kerala High Court has recently set aside an arbitral award after holding that the arbitrator committed a jurisdictional error by treating findings from an earlier arbitral award, which had already been set aside, as 'alive and final.'A bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V. M. observed the arbitrator was required to consider the dispute afresh but failed to do so. Instead, the arbitrator proceeded on the assumption that conclusions recorded in the earlier...
Delhi High Court Reaffirms Arbitral Award Allowing AIIMS To Encash 50% Of Contractor's Bank Guarantee
The Delhi High Court has upheld an arbitral award permitting the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, to encash 50% of a contractor's Performance Bank Guarantee after short payment of wages to sanitation workers was established. A Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan held that neither the arbitral award nor the district court's order dismissing objections to it suffered from perversity or patent illegality warranting interference. The court noted that the...
Pending CBI Probe Not Adjudication: Bombay High Court Upholds Arbitral Award Against Central Railway
The Bombay High Court on Wednesday held that Central Railway cannot withhold undisputed payments to a contractor merely because a criminal case is pending in relation to another supply. The Court said a CBI investigation does not amount to adjudication under a contract and cannot, by itself, justify retaining money that is otherwise payable. A single bench of Justice Gauri Godse held that the Railways were required to first raise a recovery claim and subject it to adjudication before...
Delhi High Court Reiterates Referral Court Cannot Limit Arbitrator To Specific Claims
The Delhi High Court recently reiterated that a Referral Court under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, cannot dictate which disputes an arbitrator should hear. Its role is limited to appointing an arbitrator, leaving all substantive claims and defences for the arbitrator to decide. Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar imposed costs of Rs. 50,000 on Puri Constructions, the petitioner, for attempting to restrict the arbitration to selective claims while appointing Hon'ble...
Arbitral Tribunals Cannot Grant Equity-Based Relief Unless Authorised By Contract: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court has held that arbitral tribunals must decide disputes strictly in accordance with the contract and applicable law and cannot grant relief based on "notions of equity or fairness" unless the parties have expressly authorised such an approach. Setting aside an arbitral award directing a refund of brokerage, the court held that arbitrators are not courts of law empowered to dispense equitable relief and that once transactions are held to be authorised, their contractual...