Delay In Publication Does Not Invalidate Award Unless It Is Shown That The Award Has Materially Affected Rights Of Parties: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma while dismissing an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has observed that delay in publication of award does not invalidate the award unless it is shown that the award has materially affected the rights of the parties. Facts The Appellant was awarded a contract for work by the Respondent No. 1 which was valued at Rs.1, 53,054. The contract was to be completed on 31.10.1999, however, the work...

Invocation Of Section 9 & Section 11 Of Arbitration Act Does Not Constitute Parallel Proceedings: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court single bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan held that the mere invocation of Section 9 and Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not amount to parallel proceedings. Further, the High Court noted that Section 9 is intended to provide interim relief to safeguard the subject matter of arbitration. On the other hand, Section 11 is limited to the appointment of an arbitrator when there is a dispute regarding the arbitration agreement. Brief...

Writ Petition Is Not An Appropriate Remedy To Seek Enforcement Of Arbitral Award: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jyoti Singh held that when a statutory forum is created by law for redressal of grievances, a writ petition should not be entertained ignoring the statutory dispensation. The court found merit in the preliminary objection of the Railways that a writ is not the appropriate remedy for the petitioner to seek enforcement of the arbitral award. Further, the court held that it is prudent for a Judge to not exercise discretion to allow judicial...

Whether Rights In Favor Of Third Party Are Created In Property Which Is Subject Matter Of Arbitration Cannot Be Decided Under Writ Jurisdiction: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court bench of Mr Justice Krishna S Dixit and Mr Justice Ramachandra D. Huddar has held that whether rights in favor of a third party based on sale deeds have been created in the property, which is the subject matter of arbitration, cannot be decided by the court under writ jurisdiction. Brief Facts: The petitioner is the third party purchaser of the plots in the "North Gardens Project". The said "North Gardens Project", a real estate development project at...

Unconditional Withdrawal Of Prior Petition Filed U/S 11 Of A&C Act Bars Subsequent Petition On Same Cause Of Action: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri has observed that if a petition for appointment of arbitrator is withdrawn without liberty to file a fresh petition, then by application of Order 23 Rule 1(4), CPC, a subsequent petition on the same cause of action would be barred. Facts The contract between the Petitioner and Respondent No. 1 pertained to the construction of a Staff Training Institute Building and other ancillary works, for a total contract price of Rs. 13.57...

Executing Court Erred In Seeking Transfer Certificate To Execute Award When It Had Jurisidiction To Entertain Application: Rajasthan HC Sets Aside Order

The Rajasthan High Court bench of Justice Narendra Singh Dhaddha has held that the Executing Court had committed an error in directing to furnish the transfer certificate for executing an award when it already had jurisdiction to hear the application.Court said that when the property was situated in Jaipur, the executing court had jurisdiction to entertain the execution application. So, the orders dated 12.10.2018 and 13.03.2019 passed by the Executing Court deserve to be set aside,...

In Absence Of Separate 'Seat' Clause In Arbitral Agreement, Court Mentioned In 'Venue' Clause Has Exclusive Jurisdiction: Patna HC

The Patna High Court bench of Acting Chief Justice Ashutosh Kumar has held that in the absence of any clause in the agreement apart from Clause 36.3, which speaks of the “venue” being Delhi, there cannot be any other inference or intention of the parties for the “venue” and the “seat” being different. Additionally, the court noted that the agreement in question does not mention the “seat” of arbitration but only mentions the “venue” for arbitration, which shall be at New Delhi....

MSME Council Cannot Pass Award On Account Of Failure Of Conciliation Proceedings, Has To Refer Matter To Arbitration: Karnataka HC

The Karnataka High Court has held that the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council cannot pass an award on account of conciliation having failed without referring the matter to arbitration. Justice Suraj Govindaraj held thus while allowing the petition filed by M/s Enmas GB Power Systems Projects Ltd. It said, “The matter is remitted to the Karnataka Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, to formally terminate the conciliation proceedings and thereafter take a...

Force Majeure Clause 'Eclipses' Contractual Terms, Existence And Duration Of Force Majeure Event To Be Determined By Arbitral Tribunal: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has held that while deciding a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, courts cannot adopt the approach of one-size-fit-for-all. Courts can interfere into the award only if it shocks the conscience of the court and is prone to adversely affect the administration of justice. The court held that a force majeure clause' in a contract is generally an exception or an eclipse provision, meaning...

Court Cannot Appoint Arbitrator In Absence Of Arbitration Agreement Between Disputing Parties: Orissa High Court

The Orissa High Court has held that Court cannot appoint an arbitrator to resolve dispute between the parties in absence of any arbitration agreement. The Single Bench of Acting Chief Justice Arindam Sinha (as the Judge then was) referred to Section 11(6-A) (appointment of arbitrators) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act to hold that –“Reference to arbitration can only be compelled when there is existence of an arbitration agreement…On application to Court for appointment of arbitrator,...

Power To Issue Interim Orders U/S 9 Of A&C Act Not Confined Solely To Orders Which Can Be Passed Under O.39 R.1 & 2: Delhi HC

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tejas Karia held that the powers of the court to order interim measures of protection under Section 9 of the Act are wide and are not confined solely to orders that can be passed under Order XXXIX Rules 1&2of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. However, the court would be guided by the principles underlying the Code. Clearly, such orders would also extend to granting the relief, if such relief is admissible on admitted facts....

Acceptance Of Goods Delivered Under Tax Invoice Amounts To Accepting Terms Governing It, Including Arbitration Clause: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri has held that the arbitration clause contained in the tax invoice itself is clear to the extent that acceptance of subject goods delivered under the invoice would amount to accepting the terms governing it, including the arbitration clause contained therein. Brief Facts of the case: The respondent along with his son, entered into a business transaction with the petitioner wherein against the purchase orders issued the petitioner ...