Arbitral Tribunal Can Decide Claim Between Co-Respondents Under Tripartite Agreement: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that an arbitral tribunal can decide a claim raised by one respondent against another under a tripartite agreement where the parties have agreed to refer all disputes arising out of the contract to arbitration. The court ruled that although the claim had been labelled a "counterclaim", it was, in substance, an independent contractual claim between parties to the same agreement. It also noted that Section 19 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 makes it...

Plaintiff In Commercial Suit Bound By 120-Day Time Limit To File Reply To Counterclaim: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday held that a plaintiff in a commercial suit cannot file a written statement to a defendant's counterclaim beyond the mandatory outer limit of 120 days prescribed under the Commercial Courts Act. It ruled that the statutory timeline applicable to defendants equally governs plaintiffs replying to counterclaims. A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran ruled that the mandatory timeline under the proviso to Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure...

Technical Jurisdiction Objections Cannot Defeat Merits Of Commercial Disputes Chhattisgarh High Court

The Chhattisgarh High Court on 2 July held that a party cannot defeat adjudication of a commercial dispute on merits by raising a technical objection that it filed a Section 34 application under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before a court without pecuniary jurisdiction. Justice Ravindra Kumar Agrawal dismissed a writ petition filed by Gulab Chand Jain challenging the transfer of the Municipal Corporation, Raipur's challenge to an arbitral award directing it to pay Rs. 2.32 crore...

Individual Arbitrator Cannot Be Appointed For MSME Disputes U/S 18 MSMED Act: Himachal Pradesh HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court on 7 July held that a Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council cannot refer disputes under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED Act) to an individual arbitrator and must either decide the dispute itself or refer it to an arbitral institution or centre providing alternate dispute resolution services. A Bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua set aside the ex parte arbitral award passed against Tynor Orthotics Pvt. Ltd. and...

MSME Award Can Be Challenged Without 75% Pre-Deposit if Nullity Is Prima Facie Shown: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that a court hearing a challenge to an arbitral award under the Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 ("MSME Act") is not barred from examining a credible, ex facie plea that the award is a nullity merely because the buyer has not deposited 75% of the awarded amount under Section 19 of the Act. Applying this same principle, a Division Bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora set aside an ex parte award directing...

LiveLawBiz Arbitration Cases Weekly Digest: July 6 - July 11, 2026

NOMINAL INDEXNCC Limited v. Airport Authority of India, 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 695Union of India v. M/s ISC-YUG (JV) & Anr. (Connected Matters), 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 686 Vinay Mawandia v. Bimal Mawandia & Anr., 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 684 Shriram Pistons & Rings Ltd. v. Usha International Ltd., 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 680 JPC Infrastructure and Constructions Private Limited v. Alstom Transport India Limited, 2026 LLBiz HC(DEL) 679 D.V. Anand v. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd., 2026 LLBiz...

Telangana High Court Dismisses Plea To Enforce €247.61 Million Arbitral Award Against RUSAL And Subsidiaries

The Telangana High Court has recently dismissed an execution petition filed by German company OWH SE i.L. seeking enforcement of London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) awards against Russian aluminium producer United Company RUSAL International P.J.S.C. (RUSAL) and its subsidiaries. The court held that it lacked territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition.The court stayed the operation of its judgment until June 2, 2026, to enable OWH to prefer an appeal.While doing so, Justice...

Arbitration Act Interim Relief Cannot Be Used To Stay Debarment Based On Administrative Power: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has recently held that interim relief under the Arbitration Act cannot be used to stay a debarment order where the authority's power to debar is derived from an independent statutory or administrative framework rather than the contract between the parties. Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar dismissed NCC Limited's petition seeking a stay on an Airports Authority of India (AAI) order debarring it from participating in AAI's future tenders for two years. The Court observed,...

Corporate Guarantee Cannot Replace Unconditional Bank Guarantee Agreed Between Parties: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has recently held that a corporate guarantee cannot replace an unconditional bank guarantee agreed between commercial parties merely because a party is willing to furnish one, observing that the two provide different degrees of security. Granting interim relief to Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. (ONGC), Justice Amit Borkar directed Afcons Gunanusa Joint Venture to renew and continue unconditional bank guarantees worth USD 29.91 million, EUR 4.55 million and ₹22.09...

Merely Obtaining Municipal Approvals Does Not Establish Developer's Readiness To Perform Contract: Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court has refused to grant interim relief to Jaycee Homes Private Limited in its plea to restrain Kurla Moon Rock Municipal Employee Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. from appointing another developer and to appoint a Court Receiver over the society's property. It held that obtaining municipal approvals under a registered development agreement, by itself, does not establish that a developer was ready and willing to perform its contractual obligations. Justice Amit Borkar...

Bombay High Court Orders Occupants To Vacate, Says Delay By Few Members May Affect Entire Redevelopment Project

The Bombay High Court has granted interim relief pending arbitration by directing three occupants of a co-operative housing society to vacate their premises within two weeks. The court held that, in the facts of the case, the disputes raised by them could not justify delaying a redevelopment project after 15 of the society's 17 members had already executed the redevelopment documents and the necessary municipal approvals had been obtained. Justice Amit Borkar observed, “Delay by only a few...

Bombay High Court Upholds ₹86.02 Lakh Award Against CDSL Says Depositories Cannot Avoid Liability

The Bombay High Court on 2 July held that a depository cannot escape liability for loss caused to an investor due to negligence by its depository participant by claiming that the participant became the beneficial owner of the securities after transfer. A Division Bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande upheld an arbitral award directing Central Depository Services (India) Ltd. (CDSL) to pay Rs. 86.02 lakh with 9% post award interest to investor Daksha Bhavsar. The judges...