"Maintainability" And "Jurisdiction" Cannot Be Conflated While Deciding Application U/S 20 Of Arbitration Act, 1940: Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Amit Borkar has held that maintainability and jurisdiction cannot be used interchangeably as they connote different things. Lack of jurisdiction results in the nullity of proceedings, as the court inherently lacks authority to adjudicate. Non-compliance with maintainability bars leads to dismissal without deciding the merits of the case but does not affect the court's inherent power. Brief Facts: The petitioner is challenging the order dated...

Interest On Awarded Amount Cannot Exceed Rate Of 6% As Provided U/S 30(7) Of J&K Arbitration Act: High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court bench of Justice M A Chowdhary has held that section 30(7) of the Jammu and Kashmir Arbitration Act, 1997 which was amended in 2010 is retrospective in nature. The interest on the awarded amount cannot exceed the rate of 6% per annum as provided in the section. Brief Facts This petition under section 34 of the Jammu and Kashmir Arbitration Act has been filed assailing an order passed by Sole Arbitrator Satish Chander (C.E.) (for short ...

Arbitration Monthly Digest: November, 2024

Supreme Court Government Entity Can't Be Given Differential Treatment While Staying Operation Of Arbitral Award : Supreme Court Case Title: International Seaport Dredging Pvt Ltd Versus Kamarajar Port Limited, Case Number- Civil Appeal No 12097 of 2024 Recently, the Supreme Court disapproved of a High Court's decision to exempt a government entity from depositing other amounts in addition to the arbitral award amount as a condition precedent for seeking a stay on the...

Delhi HC Allows Invocation Of Arbitration Clause After 10 Yrs, Says That Scope Of S.11(6) Plea Is Limited To Ascertaining Existence Of Agreement

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that the scope of the present proceedings is confined to ascertaining the existence of the arbitration agreement. Also, the objections raised by the respondent regarding the limitation/jurisdiction would be required to be considered by a duly constituted arbitral tribunal. Brief Facts: The petition was filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of a sole arbitrator for resolving...

SARFAESI And Arbitration Proceedings Can Proceed Parallely As Nature Of Both Proceedings Is Distinct: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Advait M Sethna has affirmed that SARFAESI proceedings are in the nature of enforcement proceedings, while arbitration is in the context of an adjudicatory proceedings. The SARFAESI proceedings and arbitration proceedings thus can proceed parallely. The court further observed that the role of referral court under section 11 of the Arbitration Act is very limited to verifying the existence of an arbitration agreement. Brief Facts This...

Court Which Appointed Arbitrator Has Jurisdiction To Substitute Arbitrator Or Extend Time U/S 29 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad held that the term "Court" under Section 29A must mean only to be the Court which has appointed the arbitrator and therefore the Court to extend the time or substitute the arbitrator would only be the Court which has appointed the arbitrator and no other Court. Additionally, the court held that Section 9 of the act deals with interim measures passed by a Court and therefore the term "Court" would have to take the meaning of the...

Court Having Exclusive Jurisdiction Would Have Juridical Seat Of Arbitration: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that where exclusive jurisdiction has been conferred on a court with respect to matters relating to arbitration, the same shall be construed to be a clear 'contrary indicia' and that the court, upon which exclusive jurisdiction has been conferred, would be the juridical seat of arbitration. Brief Facts: The petition has been filed under Section 11 (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 vis-a-vis appointment of...

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up [25th November To 1st December, 2024]

Supreme Court S.29A Arbitration | 'Sufficient Cause' To Extend Time For Award Should Be Interpreted To Facilitate Effective Dispute Resolution : Supreme Court Case Title: M/S AJAY PROTECH PVT. LTD. VERSUS GENERAL MANAGER & ANR., SLP (C) NO. 2272 OF 2024 Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 915 Extending the time for an arbitral tribunal to pass its award, the Supreme Court recently observed that extension can be allowed even after the expiry of the statutory period and the...

After Execution Of Sale Deed, Arbitration Clause Mentioned In Agreement For Sale Becomes Ineffective: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court Bench of Justice R. I. Chagla has held that the Agreement for sale has come to an end by the execution of the Deed of Conveyance / Sale Deed. It is well settled that once a Conveyance is executed, the object, purpose, effectiveness and validity of the Agreement for sale comes to an end. Therefore, the arbitration clause in the Agreement comes to an end as the Agreement stands fully discharged and does not have any legal effect upon the execution of the Conveyance. ...

Award Suffers From Patent Illegality When Adjudication Is Done Without Giving Any Reasons: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Satyen Vaidya, while a Section 34 petition, has held that when an award has been found to be rendered without giving any reasoning regarding the adjudication of the disputes, the said award suffers from patent illegality apparent on the face of the award, and liable to be set aside. Facts: The petitioner was awarded a contract to carry out certain construction activities on Chilladhar-Bihar road and Jibhi-Bahu road by Respondent No. 2...

S.9 Application Not Appropriate For Relief Against Non-Signatory When There Is No Dispute Between Parties To Be Referred To Arbitration: Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Arif S. Doctor has held that Section 9 of the A&C Act is not the correct mechanism to obtain relief against an entity when the privity of contract is absent between Factual Overview: The dispute arose regarding a Redevelopment Agreement (RDA) and a Supplementary Agreement (SA) dated 20 July 2022. The agreement was entered between the Developer (Petitioner) and the Co-operative Housing Society Limited (Respondent No. 1), comprising eleven...

Limited Scope Of Examination U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act, Award Vitiated By Patent Illegality: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Sachin Datta held that the Arbitral Tribunal has awarded the claim for loss of profit for the period the Contract was prolonged without any evidence or material to support the claim. Therefore, the impugned award is vitiated by patent illegality. Brief Facts: The present dispute arose with respect to an agreement for construction of a poly clinic which was constructed by the respondent. As per the agreement the work was...