Hidden Doctrine In Gayatri Balasamy: How Supreme Court Used Implied Powers To Transform Arbitration Law

When the Supreme Court ruled on Gayatri Balasamy v. ISG Novasoft Technologies Ltd[1] it made waves, earning the title of the “modification judgment.” Most discussions centered on a key takeaway: Indian courts can now, in certain situations, modify arbitral awards rather than just nullifying them. However, if you dig a little deeper into those 61 pages, you'll uncover a more subtle yet significant shift. For the first time, the Court tapped into the Doctrine of Implied Powers to broaden the...

Pendency Of Appeal U/S 37 A&C Act Against First Award Does Not Bar Fresh Arbitration Proceedings: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court held that pendency of an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) does not prohibit a party from initiating a fresh round of arbitration when an earlier arbitral award has already been set aside. Accordingly, the present application under section 11 of the Arbitration Act was allowed and a sole arbitrator was appointed. Justice Gautam A. Ankhad held that “the Section 11 Court ought not to venture beyond examining the ...

Apportionment Of Liability Without Evidence Is Akin To 'Panchayati Approach': Bombay High Court Sets Aside NSE Arbitral Award Against Broker

The Bombay High Court set aside an arbitral award passed under National Stock Exchange (NSE) bye-laws that had upheld an order passed by Investor Grievance Redressal Panel (IGRP) directing Peerless Securities Limited to pay ₹7.18 lakhs to Vostok (Fareast) Securities Pvt. Ltd. for the losses caused by unauthorised trading in the trading and future segment. The IGRP had held that both the parties were equally responsible for the losses and directed the broker to bear 50% of the liability....

Claim For Demurrage As Liquidated Damages Does Not Constitute Debt Until Liability Is Determined: Andhra Pradesh High Court

The Andhra Pradesh High Court refused to grant interim relief for attachment of goods and security under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) holding that the liquidated damages in the form of demurrage does not constitute debt until the liability is determined by an arbitral award. Justice Challa Gunaranjan held that “petitioner has moved the present petition nearly after three years, therefore, as observed by Hon'ble Apex Court, if the applicant...

Mortgage, Enforcement And Related Declaratory Reliefs Are Non-Arbitrable: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court Bench of Justice Sandeep V Marne has observed that enforcement of mortgage is a right in rem and any dispute seeking enforcement of mortgage cannot be referred to arbitration. Civil suit will lie for enforcement of such a right in rem. Facts Defendant No.1 and his partners are developers appointed for redevelopment of Defendant No.5 – Society under Development Agreement dated February, 2014 and Supplemental Development Agreement dated March 16, 2021. The...

Trial Court Can't Revisit Issue Of Limitation Once Delay Has Been Condoned By High Court: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court dismissed an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) filed by Delhi Transco Limited (DTL) upholding an arbitral award in favour of M/s Hindustan Urban Infrastructure Limited. The Court further held that once an issue of limitation has already been decided by the High Court and the delay in filing the petition under section 34 of the Arbitration Act was condoned, the same issue cannot be revisited by the District Court. ...

Forced Shift Of Arbitration Venue Without Consent Of Party Amounts To Perversity: Telangana High Court

The Telangana High Court has held that the forced shift of the Arbitration Venue without the consent of a party amounts to perversity and patent lack of inherent jurisdiction.The order was passed in a writ petition, challenging a procedural order, by way of which the venue of the 'Closing hearing' was moved from New Delhi to IDRC in London without considering the objections of the respondent“The forced shift from New Delhi to London would hence not only amount to perversity in terms of the...

When High Court Appoints, High Court Extends: Clarifying Jurisdictional Anomaly Under Section 29A Of Arbitration Act

When Parliament introduced Section 29A into the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Arbitration Act”) it was hailed as a reform that would make arbitration faster and more disciplined.Section 29A of the Arbitration Act mandates that an arbitral award must be passed within twelve months from the date of completion of pleadings. This period may be further extended by mutual consent of the parties for an additional six months. Once this statutory period expires, the mandate of the arbitral...

[Arbitration Act] Limitation For Filing S.11 Application To Be Calculated From Date Of S.21 Notice, Not From Date Of Dispute: Rajasthan HC

The Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, has held that the limitation for filing a Section 11 application under the A&C Act would be calculated from the date of serving the Section 21 notice to the other side and not from the date when the cause of action had arisen. The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand was hearing a Section 11 application praying for the appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties arising out of the agreement dated 29.02.2016. ...

Right To Seek Arbitration Not Lost Just Because Arbitration Clause Became Inoperable Due To Statutory Amendment: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that the invalidity or inoperability of an arbitration clause, such as one naming an ineligible arbitrator under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, does not nullify the underlying arbitration agreement between the parties. The Court clarified that in such cases, the Court is empowered to step in and appoint a neutral arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Act to preserve the efficacy of the arbitration mechanism.The Court emphasised that the...

[Arbitration Act] S.11 Application Is Maintainable Even Without Notice U/S 21 If Other Party Is Aware Of Dispute: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court Jaipur Bench has held that a Section 11 petition under the A&C Act without issuing the notice invoking arbitration (“NIA”) u/s 21 of the A&C Act would be maintainable if the Respondents were aware of the dispute being referred to arbitration. The bench noted that the Respondents were well-versed in the dispute raised by the Petitioner. They could not have been surprised after the Petitioner's plaint was returned by the trial court under Order VII Rule 10...

HCL Infosystems Wins ₹102.81 Crore Arbitral Award Against UIDAI

HCL Infosystems, a HCL Group company, informed the stock exchanges on Sunday that it has received a ₹102.81 crore arbitration award in its favour against the Unique Identification Authority of India (UIDAI).The award covers dues, deductions, and additional costs for Managed Service Provider (MSP) services provided between August 7, 2019, and August 6, 2021. It includes 10% annual interest up to the date of the award, and the same rate applies until full payment is made.UIDAI's counterclaims of...