Dispute Between Service Providers Can’t Be Referred to Arbitration: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (TRAI Act) is a self-contained Code, intended to deal with all disputes arising out of the Telecommunication Services provided in the country and therefore, the dispute between service providers which is likely to affect the consumers/subscribers, cannot be referred to arbitration. Thus, the Court concluded that the dispute between the service providers fell under the umbrella of the Telecom Dispute...

Correspondence Between Parties Cannot Overrule Clear Intention Under Agreement Providing For Optional Arbitration: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has ruled that where a clause stipulated that the parties ‘may’ be referred to arbitration, the said clause does not constitute an arbitration agreement, despite the fact that the clause conferred a binding nature upon the decision of the Arbitrator. The Court added that the said clause merely contemplated a future possibility and a choice to refer the disputes to arbitration.The bench of Justice Bharati Dangre held that once an option is made available to a party to not be...

All India Annual Digest Of Arbitration Cases-2022- Supreme Court And High Courts

Supreme Court:Issue Of Arbitrability Should Be Left To Arbitrator Unless On The Face It Is Found That Dispute Is Non- Arbitrable: Supreme CourtCase Title: VGP Marine Kingdom Pvt Ltd versus Kay Ellen ArnoldCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 914The Supreme Court reiterated that while considering application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the dispute with respect to the arbitrability should be left to the arbitrator, unless on the face it is found that the dispute is not...

Disclosure Of Impartiality By Arbitrator Appointed Under MSMED Act Not Against Spirit Of Section 24, Provisions Of A&C Act Shall Apply: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court recently ruled that the overriding effect of Section 24 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED Act) would not operate as an absolute bar upon an Arbitrator appointed under the special statute to disclose its independence and impartiality in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.Justice Subhasis Dasgupta also held that that an Arbitrator appointed under Section 18(3) of the MSMED Act has the power to...

Arbitration Can Be Invoked Against Party Deleted From Section 9 Application: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has ruled that once anapplication is filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 (A&C Act), merely because the applicant choses to subsequently delete aparty from the proceedings under Section 9, it cannot be held that the arbitralproceedings can never be invoked against such a party.The bench of Justice Manish Pitale held that a party applying forinterim measures under Section 9 may wish to delete certain parties, if itfinds that the interim...

Reference Limited To Quantum Of Compensation; Dispute Non-Arbitrable If Insurer Disputes Liability: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has ruled that where the arbitration clause only provided for reference of dispute relating to quantum of compensation payable under the insurance policy, the plea taken by the insurance company, disputing its liability under the policy, would make the dispute non-arbitrable. The bench of Justice Bharati Dangre reiterated that an arbitration clause has to be interpreted strictly. The Court observed that the insurer's unequivocal admission of liability under the...

Request For Appointment Of Arbitrator, Is Not A Waiver Of Right To Disqualify Under S. 12 (5) Of The Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a unilateral request made by one of the parties for setting the appointment procedure in motion, as provided in the arbitration agreement, would not constitute an agreement falling under the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act) to waive off the disqualification contemplated under Section 12(5). The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma observed that the arbitration agreement conferred the power to appoint a...

Supreme Court Annual Digest 2022- Arbitration [ With Parallel Citations]

Arbitration Act, 1940ArbitrationAct, 1940- The powers exercised by the court under the provisions of the 1940 Act arejudicial powers and that the power to make an award "Rule of Court" is not amechanical power. (Para 127 (ii), 113) Secretaryof Govt. of Kerala Irrigation Department v. James Varghese, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 447 : (2022) 9 SCC 593Arbitration and Conciliation Act1996Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Appeal against Bombay HC judgment which dismissed appeal against interimaward of...

Additional Work Without Consent Of The Employer; Arbitrator Can't Award Damages : Gauhati High Court

The Gauhati High Court has held that the arbitrator cannot invoke Section 70 of the Indian Contract Act to award damages on quantum meruit for the additional work carried out without the prior consent of the employer when the agreement did not contemplate any additional work. The bench of Justice Kalyan Rai Surana held that when the agreement, containing the arbitration clause, did not contemplate any additional work and the contractor carries out the additional work without the prior...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 18 December To 24 December, 2022

Allahabad High Court: Section 9 Application, Against Cashing Unconditional BG; Court To Consider Only Terms Of BG: Allahabad High Court Case Title: U.P. Expressways Industrial Development Authority versus M/s. Sahakar Global Ltd. The Allahabad High Court has ruled that while dealing with an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), seeking to restrain the invocation or encashment of the Bank Guarantee, the Court is only required to...

Execution Of Arbitration Awards;Section 47 Of CPC Not Applicable : Tripura High Court

The High Court of Tripura has held that Section 47 of CPC which provides for certain questions to be determined by the executing Court does not apply to execution of an arbitration award under the A&C Act. The bench of Justice S.G. Chattopadhyay held that the executing court, exercising power under Section 36 of the Act, cannot entertain any objections against the award and a party can only challenge the award in terms of Section 34 of the A&C and no objection can be raised...

Best Of 2022- 40 Important Supreme Court Judgments On ARBITRATION With Parallel Citations

Court while considering application seeking appointment of arbitrator cannot go into question of novation of contract. Meenakshi Solar Power Pvt. Ltd. v. Abhyudaya Green Economic Zones Pvt. Ltd., 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 988Issue of arbitrability should be left to arbitrator unless on the face it is found that dispute is non- arbitrable. VGP Marine Kingdom Pvt. Ltd. v. Kay Ellen Arnold, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 914Petition to set aside arbitral award lies before a high court only when it possesses...