Calcutta High Court Upholds ₹14.49 Crore Arbitral Award To Sourav Ganguly Against Former Talent Manager

The Calcutta High Court on Thursday dismissed an appeal by Percept Talent Management Ltd., upholding a Rs. 14.49 crore arbitral award in favour of former Indian cricketer Sourav Ganguly and finding that the company had lost its right to terminate a 2003 Player Representation Agreement by waiting too long and continuing to act as his agent. The judgment was delivered on April 16, 2026 by a Division Bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi. The court also upheld the...

Even Consent Cannot Cure Lack of Jurisdiction In HC Appointment Of Arbitrator In ICA: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that an arbitrator appointed by a High Court in an international commercial arbitration has no authority in law to decide the dispute, and any award passed in such proceedings is void. A bench of Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal said, “The conjoint reading of Section 11(6) and Section 11(12)(a), ACA makes it abundantly clear that the power to appoint an arbitrator in an ICA lies exclusively with the Supreme Court. The High Court has no...

Appeal Not Maintainable Against Arbitral Tribunal's Impleadment Order: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on 8 April, held that an order allowing impleadment of parties cannot be challenged in appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 merely because the Arbitral Tribunal passed it under Section 17, which empowers the Tribunal to issue interim and procedural orders during arbitration to manage the proceedings and grant temporary reliefs. A Bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan clarified that Section 37 contains an exhaustive list of appealable...

Mere Allegation Of Fraud Not A Bar To Arbitration: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court on 8 April held that mere allegations of fraud or prior monetary transactions do not oust arbitration where the dispute arises from agreements containing arbitration clauses. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C.M. Poonacha held that Courts must refer parties to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act unless a party shows that no prima facie arbitration agreement exists. It further noted the interplay with the...

Pecuniary Jurisdiction No Bar Once Court Is Designated As Commercial Appellate Court: Gauhati High Court

The Gauhati High Court on 31 March, held that once the State designates a Court as a Commercial Appellate Court under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, the appellate forum is determined strictly by such designation and not by the ordinary pecuniary jurisdiction of the District Judge. A Bench comprising Justice Mridul Kumar Kalita dismissed an appeal filed by Lokesh Anand Singhal and Shilpi Anand Singhal, holding that the High Court lacked jurisdiction as the statutory appellate remedy lay before...

Interim Relief Provision In Arbitration Act Cannot Be Invoked To Revive Terminated Contract: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that where an agreement has, prima facie, ceased to subsist, courts cannot grant interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in a manner that effectively revives such a contract. Dismissing an appeal filed by JLT Energy 9 SAS, a Division Bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan upheld a Single Judge's refusal to restrain Hindustan Cleanenergy Limited from creating third-party rights in its solar project assets. The...

Gateway Of India Jetty Construction Dispute: Bombay HC Refuses To Stop ₹31.86 Cr Bank Guarantee Encashment

The Bombay High Court has recently declined to restrain the invocation and encashment of bank guarantees worth Rs 31.86 crore in a dispute between RKEC Projects Limited and the Maharashtra Maritime Board over the construction of a passenger jetty and terminal near the Gateway of India in Mumbai. The ruling came on a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which allows courts to grant temporary protection until disputes are decided through arbitration, before...

Delhi High Court Partly Sets Aside Arbitral Award For Denying Pre-Reference Interest Without Reasons

The Delhi High Court has held that where an arbitrator, despite finding prolonged and unjustified delay by an insurer in settling a claim, fails to provide reasons as mandated under Section 31(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for denying pre-reference interest, the award suffers from patent illegality and is liable to be set aside. Partly setting aside an award in a dispute between Panchanan International Private Limited and the Oriental Insurance Company Limited, a Bench of...

Delhi High Court Holds 'May Be Referred To Arbitration' Clause Binding Where Agreement Prescribes Binding Process

The Delhi High Court has held that a dispute resolution clause in an arbitration agreement between Lifewell Diagnostics Private Limited and Micron Laboratory, which states that disputes “may be referred to arbitration”, can constitute a valid and binding arbitration agreement where the same clause prescribes a detailed procedure for arbitration and provides that the arbitral award shall be final and binding. A single bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna observed that the use of the word “may” does...

Article 226 Can Be Invoked Against Non Est MSME Award Violating Statutory Provisions: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on 2 April, held that a writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable against an award passed by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council when such award is non est in law and contrary to mandatory statutory provisions. Justice S.G. Chapalgaonkar observed that where an impugned award is passed in violation of the mandatory provisions of the MSMED Act, 2006 and the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, it cannot be treated as a valid arbitral award in the...

Patna High Court Sets Aside Award Based On Pleadings Alone Without Evidence, Cites Natural Justice

The Patna High Court has recently set aside an arbitral award and a subsequent order upholding it, holding that an award based solely on pleadings without proof of documents violates the principles of natural justice and cannot be sustained. It held that although arbitral proceedings are not bound by strict rules of evidence, ensuring that documents are properly admitted or denied; their contents are duly proved; and that parties are given a real opportunity to rebut the material relied upon,...

Australia High Court Rejects $111 Million Arbitral Award Enforcement Against India In Antrix-Devas Case

The High Court of Australia has dismissed an appeal seeking enforcement of an arbitral award of over USD 111 million against India, holding that ratifying the New York Convention does not amount to a waiver of sovereign immunity. The dispute arose from claims by Mauritian investors in Bengaluru-based Devas Multimedia Private Limited over the cancellation of a satellite spectrum deal between Antrix Corporation Limited, the commercial arm of the Indian Space Research Organisation, and Devas. ...