ARBITRATION
Bombay High Court Upholds Foreign Award In TASL–Ion Exchange Dispute, Rejects Public Policy Challenge
The Bombay High Court on 17 March held that the “public policy of India” ground under Section 48 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 (the Act), cannot be used to apply Indian legal principles to challenge enforcement of a foreign arbitral award arising from a foreign-law governed contract. Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan allowed a petition filed by Trading and Agency Services Limited (TASL), a Qatari company, to enforce a foreign arbitral award of USD 978,300 against Ion Exchange (India) Limited. The...
Disputes During Subsisting Works Contract Can Be Referred To Arbitration Within 3 Years: Madhya Pradesh HC
The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur has recently held that contractors can approach the arbitration tribunal within three years if a dispute arises while a government works contract is still ongoing, even though the law also prescribes a one-year limitation after the final authority's decision. A Division Bench of Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Pradeep Mittal set aside an order of the M.P. Arbitration Tribunal, which had dismissed a plea filed by LCC Projects Pvt. Ltd. against Madhya...
'No Second Bite At The Cherry': Bombay High Court Refuses Plea For Fresh Arbitrator By Negligent Party
The Bombay High Court has observed that while the expiry of an arbitrator's mandate under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not automatically terminate arbitral proceedings, a defaulting party cannot be allowed “another bite at the cherry” by seeking appointment of a fresh arbitrator after a court has already refused to extend the mandate due to that party's own negligence. A single-judge bench of Justice Sandeep V. Marne, while dismissing an application filed by...
Bombay High Court Refuses to Interfere With Enhanced Compensation In NH-6 Land Acquisition Arbitration Case
The Bombay High Court has refused to interfere with enhanced compensation awarded to landowners for acquisition of land for widening National Highway-6 from Jalgaon to the Gujarat boundary, holding that no case was made out for interference under the limited scope of appellate review. Dismissing a batch of arbitration appeals filed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), a single-judge bench of Justice Arun R. Pedneker upheld the arbitral awards as well as the orders passed under...
Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere With NTPC Plea Against MSME Award Over Failure To Make 75% Pre-Deposit
The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed a special leave petition filed by NTPC Ltd, a government-owned power generation company, refusing to interfere with a Madhya Pradesh High Court order that declined to entertain its challenge to an MSME Facilitation Council award for non-compliance with the statutory pre-deposit requirement. A bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar said, “After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, we see no reason and ground to interfere with the...
No Fresh Arbitration Maintainable On Same Cause Without Liberty To Refile: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Wednesday held that a litigant cannot initiate fresh arbitration proceedings on the same cause of action after abandoning earlier proceedings, emphasising that such conduct amounts to abuse of process and is barred by principles underlying Order 23 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. A bench of Justices Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Alok Aradhe was hearing an appeal against the Punjab and Haryana High Court order dated November 8, 2024, which had allowed a fresh...
LiveLawBiz Arbitration Cases Monthly Digest: March 2026
Supreme CourtSupreme Court Refuses To Interfere With Bombay High Court Ruling In Vedanta–Sunflag LAM Coke Arbitration DisputeCase Title : Vedanta Limited vs Sunflag Iron & Steel Company Limited Case Number : Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 7569/2026 CITATION : 2026 LLBiz SC 100 The Supreme Court recently declined to interfere with a judgment of the Bombay High Court dismissing Vedanta Ltd's writ petition challenging an arbitral order in its dispute with Sunflag Iron...
Madras High Court Upholds Arbitral Award Granting Damages To Power Purchaser After Supplier's First Breach
The Madras High Court on 6 March, held that an arbitral award granting damages for non-supply of electricity cannot be interfered with when the supplier itself commits the initial breach of the power supply agreement by unilaterally revising the tariff and stopping supply without following the contractual procedure. A Division Bench of Justices C.V. Karthikeyan and K. Kumaresh Babu dismissed an appeal filed by OPG Power Generation Pvt Ltd (OPG) under Section 37 of the Arbitration and...
Foreign Arbitral Award Unenforceable In India Without Valid Arbitration Agreement: Kerala High Court
The Kerala High Court on Tuesday held that a foreign arbitral award, even if confined to costs, cannot be enforced in India under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, if it is rendered in the absence of a valid arbitration agreement, holding that such disputes are not capable of settlement by arbitration under Indian law. Justice S. Manu dismissed an execution petition filed by Concilium Marine Group AB and Concejo AB, two Swedish entities, against an Indian resident, observing, “A...
Contractual Bar On Damages Does Not Exclude Right To Restoration Of Benefits: Bombay High Court Modifies Arbitral Award
The Bombay High Court has held that a contractual clause barring damages or compensation in a redevelopment agreement is enforceable but does not restrict the statutory right of a developer to seek restoration of benefits under Section 64 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. Justice Sandeep V. Marne partly set aside an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that while the arbitrator was justified in denying damages in view of Clause 22 of the...
Limitation To Challenge Arbitral Award Begins On Delivery Of Signed Award Copy To Party: Madhya Pradesh HC
The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore has held that the limitation period for challenging an arbitral award begins only from the date on which a signed copy of the award is delivered to the party, setting aside a Commercial Court order that had dismissed a challenge as time-barred.A division bench of Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Alok Awasthi ruled that Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 must be read together with Section 31(5), which mandates delivery of a...
Delhi High Court Sets Aside Rs 11.93 Crore Damages In Favour Of ONGC For Lack Of Proof Of Loss
The Delhi High Court has struck down an award of Rs 11.93 crore in additional damages granted to ONGC Limited against UEM India Pvt. Ltd., finding that the arbitral tribunal fixed the amount without any proof of actual loss, without even recording that such loss was incapable of proof, and without explaining how the figure was arrived at. A bench of Justice Avneesh Jhingan held that the award violated the requirement of a reasoned decision under Section 31(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation...