Pre-Dispute Clause Cannot Replace Post-Dispute Written Waiver Of Arbitrator Ineligibility: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court has upheld the setting aside of an arbitral award passed by an arbitrator appointed unilaterally by the Managing Director of the Central Warehousing Corporation. It held that a contractual clause permitting such appointment could not override the post-dispute written waiver requirement under Section 12(5) A Division Bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Ajay Kumar Gupta dismissed an appeal filed by contractor Amal Krishna Dey against the Commercial Court's...

Award Debtor Cannot Sidestep Mandatory 75% Deposit To Challenge MSME Award Through Execution Objections: Telengana HC

The Telangana High Court has held that an award debtor cannot use execution-stage objections to sidestep the mandatory 75% deposit required under the MSMED Act. The ruling came in a dispute between MSME supplier Atlantis Agritech Private Limited and Kendriya Bhandar, after the latter sought to keep asset-disclosure proceedings in abeyance pending its application under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure before the Executing Court. The High Court held that such proceedings cannot be...

MSME Council Location Does Not Determine Court's Jurisdiction In Post-Award Proceedings: Calcutta HIgh Court

The Calcutta High Court has reiterated that the location of an MSME Facilitation Council does not, by itself, determine the territorial jurisdiction of courts over proceedings arising from an arbitral award.Applying this principle, the court held that an exclusive-jurisdiction clause in favour of the New Delhi courts governed a Section 29A application seeking an extension of the arbitral mandate after an award was passed by the West Bengal Micro Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (WBMSEFC),...

Time-Barred Claim Order Is Arbitral Award, Superfluous Termination Remark Cannot Bar Challenge: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that an arbitral tribunal's decision rejecting a claim as time-barred is a final arbitral award. It said that a separate observation terminating the proceedings under Section 32(2)(c) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, was unnecessary and could not be used to deny the claimant a challenge to the award. Referring to Section 32(2)(c), the bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra held “The said provision has nothing...

Madras High Court Says Time Extension Doesn't Waive Liquidated Damages If Right Is Reserved

The Madras High Court has refused to interfere with an arbitral award in a dispute over delays in the expansion of Neyveli Lignite Corporation Limited's First Thermal Power Station by two 210 MW units. It held that NLC had not waived its right to claim liquidated damages by granting extensions of time, as each extension expressly reserved that right.A bench of Justice P. Velmurugan and Justice K. Govindarajan Thilakavadi observed:“Where the promisee permits further performance and extends the...

MSME Registration Cannot Revive Abandoned Arbitration Claims: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a supplier cannot revive claims abandoned in an earlier arbitration merely by subsequently obtaining registration under the Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela observed that a party that did not challenge the termination of the earlier arbitration cannot use subsequent MSME registration to reopen the same claims.The court held, “Having not availed the same, in the opinion of this Court, a party cannot be...

Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Restraint On Arbitrator, Stresses Limited Judicial Intervention In Arbitration

The Calcutta High Court on Friday set aside an order of the Darjeeling District Judge restraining a Sole Arbitrator from proceeding with a pending application under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that courts must exercise restraint in interfering with an ongoing arbitral process.A bench of Justice Ravi Kishan Kapur and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya was hearing an appeal against an order of the District Judge, Darjeeling, in a dispute between family...

Tata Motors Finance 'Took Law In Its Hands' By Acting On Ex Parte Arbitral Award To Auction Truck: Patna High Court

The Patna High Court has held that Tata Motors Finance Limited could not proceed against a borrower's commercial vehicle on the basis of an ex parte arbitral award without following the prescribed enforcement process.Justice Girijish Kumar observed that the finance company had failed to act under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and had “taken the law in its hand," which was impermissible.Section 36 requires an enforceable arbitral award to be enforced in the same manner...

Delhi High Court Says Failed Conciliation Talks Cannot Be Used To Decide Arbitration Claims

The Delhi High Court has ruled that material recorded during unsuccessful conciliation cannot later be relied upon to decide the same dispute in arbitration. Justice Avneesh Jhingan observed that the confidentiality of such proceedings must continue even after a settlement attempt fails.“The proceedings during conciliation cannot be considered and relied upon in case the arbitration of dispute is necessitated. The proceedings during conciliation are different but when an issue is contested equal...

Period Of Judicially Foreclosed Arbitral Award Execution Excluded From Limitation: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court on 7 September held that the period during which execution of an arbitral award was practically unavailable due to binding judicial precedent cannot be counted for computing the limitation period. Justice Gaurang Kanth allowed Steel Authority of India Limited's (SAIL) execution petition, holding that the period from 29 February 2008 to 22 October 2015 had to be excluded while computing the 12-year limitation period. The Bench held:“To hold that limitation ran...

Incidental Civil Construction Doesn't Make Waste Management Contract A Works Contract: Madhya Pradesh HC

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on 3 September reiterated that a waste management contract does not become a “works contract” merely because it involves incidental civil construction, and that disputes arising from such a contract can be referred to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Justice Deepak Khot allowed Susajja JV Anand LLP's application against Bhopal Municipal Corporation and appointed former Calcutta High Court Chief Justice Sujoy Paul as the sole arbitrator...

Execution Court's Finding That Arbitral Award Is Unenforceable Does Not Extend Limitation: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has ruled that the time spent in an earlier arbitration cannot be excluded from the limitation period merely because an execution court later finds that the resulting arbitral award is unenforceable or a nullity.Section 43(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, provides for exclusion of the period between the commencement of an arbitration and the date on which a court sets aside the arbitral award while calculating the limitation period for subsequent...