Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 22nd May To 28th May, 2022

Supreme Court: Arbitration Act - Dispose Sec 11(5) & 11(6) Applications Pending For Over 1 Year Within 6 Months : Supreme Court To High Courts Case Title: M/s Shree Vishnu Constructions versus The Engineer in Chief Military Engineering Service And Ors. Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 523 The Supreme Court of India has made strong observations emphasising the need for High Courts to decide applications for appointments of Arbitrators at the earliest. A Bench comprising ...

A Party Cannot Dispute The Jurisdiction On Account Of Non-Existence Of The Arbitration Agreement After Submitting Of The Jurisdiction Of The Arbitrator: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi held that a party cannot dispute the jurisdiction on account of non-existence of the arbitration agreement after submitting to the jurisdiction of the arbitrator. The Single Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru held that generally, the arbitration clause contained in the main agreement would also fall when the validity of the main agreement is challenged and the dispute would be non-arbitrable. However, when a party agrees to refer the dispute to arbitration and...

The Objection Regarding The Non-Applicability Of The MSMED Act To 'Works Contract' Is To Be Decided In Arbitration By The MSME Council: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court held that objections regarding the non-applicability of the MSMED Act to works contract can be decided in arbitration by MSME Council. The Division Bench of Chief Justice Prakash Shrivastava and Justice Rajarshi Bharadwaj upheld the order of the Single Bench whereby the petitioner was referred to arbitration before the MSME Council with a direction that his objection regarding the non-applicability of the MSMED Act as the contract was a works contract would...

No Stamp Duty Leviable On Award Of Compensation Passed By An Arbitrator Under Section 3G(5) Of The National Highways Act: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has ruled that an award of compensation passed by an Arbitrator under Section 3G(5) of the National Highways Act, 1956 does not attract stamp duty. The Single Bench of Justice Suraj Govindaraj held that an award of compensation passed by the Land Acquisition Officer under the Land Acquisition Act or under any other similarly situated enactment, including the National Highways Act (NHA), is not amenable to payment of any stamp duty. The Court added that merely...

Plaintiff Is Not Entitled To Return Of Court Fees When The Parties Are Referred To Arbitration Under Section 8 Of The A&C Act: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that the plaintiff is not entitled to return of Court Fess when the parties are referred to arbitration under Section 8 of the A&C Act. The Single Bench of Justice Amit Bansal held that the benefit of Section 16[1] of the Court Fees Act would only be available to the plaintiff when the parties are referred to arbitration for settlement in terms of Section 89 of the CPC and not under Section 8 of the A&C Act. The plaintiff contented that as...

Arbitral Award Must Be In Accordance With The Terms Of The Contract: Reiterates Telangana High Court

The Telangana High Court has reiterated that an arbitral award must be in accordance with the terms of the contract. The Bench, consisting of Justice P. Naveen Rao and Dr. Justice G. Radha Rani, quashed an arbitral award on the ground that the clauses of the contract were not properly construed by the Arbitrator and that it was a non-speaking order which was rendered without discussing the contentions raised by the claimant. The petitioner C. Srimannarayana was appointed as a dealer...

Waiver Under Section 12(5) Of A&C Act Has To Be By An Express Agreement In Writing: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that any right under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act), that deals with the ineligibility of certain persons to be appointed as an arbitrator, can be waived of only by an express Agreement in writing entered into after the disputes had arisen between the parties. The Single Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru dismissed the contention that since the petitioner had participated in the arbitral proceedings it was precluded...

Arbitration Act - Dispose Sec 11(5) & 11(6) Applications Pending For Over 1 Year Within 6 Months : Supreme Court To High Courts

All endeavour shall be made by High Courts to decide the applications under Sections 11(5) and 11(6) of the Arbitration Act at the earliest, preferably within a period of six months from the date of filing of the applications.

The Provisions For The Quantum Of Damages Under Land Acquisition Act, 2013 Would Apply To Arbitrations Under The Resettlement Of Displaced Persons (Land Acquisition) Act, 1948: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that the provisions for the quantum of damages under Land Acquisition Act, 2013 (LARR Act) would apply to arbitrations under the Resettlement of Displaced Persons (Land Acquisition) Act, 1948. The Single Bench of Justice Navin Chawla has held that the provisions of the LARR Act being beneficial in nature would also apply to all the pending arbitrations under the Resettlement of Displaced Persons (Land Acquisition) Act. The Court further held that...

Arbitral Award Passed In Disregard To Judicial Decisions Conflicts With The Public Policy : Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that an arbitral award that is not in consonance with the judicial decisions and principles laid down by the courts of India would be in violation of the fundamental policy of Indian law and thus in conflict with the public policy of India under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act). The Bench, consisting of Justices Mukta Gupta and Neena Bansal Krishna, upheld the order of the Single Judge setting aside the arbitral award...

Arbitrator Cannot Rewrite Terms Of The Agreement Merely Because It Flouts Business Common Sense: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi held that the arbitrator cannot re-write the terms of the agreement between the parties merely because they flout business common sense. The Single Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru has held that an award wherein the arbitrator re-work a bargain between the parties merely because it is commercially difficult for one party to perform the same would be against the fundamental policy of Indian Law and vitiated by patent illegality. The Court held that when the...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 15th May to 21st May, 2022

Bombay High Court: Novation Of Partnership Deed, Arbitration Clause Contained In The Deed Can Be Invoked: Bombay High Court Case Title: Praful A. Mehta versus Nainesh M. Gandhi The Bombay High Court has ruled that the allegation of forgery is required to be dealt with at the stage of trial before the Arbitrator. The Single Bench of Justice A. K. Menon dismissed the contention that an arbitration clause cannot be invoked as a result of novation of the agreement containing the...