No Fresh Notice Needed After Award Set Aside If Arbitration Had Already Commenced: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 16 July held that a party need not issue a fresh notice under Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (which marks commencement of arbitral proceedings) before seeking appointment of a new arbitrator after an arbitral award is set aside, if arbitration had already commenced through a valid notice. A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad rejected the objection raised by Sumant Aggarwal and others and appointed Mr. Kapil Sankhla as the sole...

Finance Ministry's High-Value Arbitration Policy Conflicts With India's Declared Policy Justice Ujjal Bhuyan

Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan on Saturday criticized the Finance Ministry's policy discouraging arbitration in high-value government contracts, saying its guidelines are "clearly in conflict with India's declared policy and international commitments."Justice Bhuyan made the remarks while delivering his keynote address at an event titled "Arbitration in India: Reform, Relevance & the Road Ahead" organised by the Law Forum.Delhi High Court judge Justice C. Hari Shankar and former...

Chhattisgarh High Court Restores ABB In Arbitration Appeals After Hitachi Challenges Substitution Order

The Chhattisgarh High Court has restored multinational engineering company ABB Ltd. as a party to two pending arbitration appeals after Hitachi Energy India Ltd. challenged an earlier order substituting it in ABB's place. The court held that ABB could not be discharged from the proceedings merely on its own assertion that liability in the pending appeals had transferred to Hitachi under a National Company Law Tribunal-approved Scheme of Arrangement.Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi held that...

Arbitrator Can Pronounce Award Once Matter Is Reserved Despite Counsel's Withdrawal: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court has held that a sole arbitrator can proceed to pronounce an arbitral award even if the respondents' counsel does not produce documents he had undertaken to file and later withdraws his vakalat, provided the matter has already been reserved for passing of the award. The court held that no further orders were required in the application and closed it. Justice K. Kumaresh Babu observed, "This Court is of the view that, when the matter had been reserved for passing of the...

Jharkhand HC Directs JUIDCO To Pay Eagle Infra's Dues, Holds Guarantee Release Admits Completion

The Jharkhand High Court on 15 July held that a public authority cannot withhold admitted contractual dues after releasing a contractor's performance bank guarantee, as such release shows that the authority accepted the contractor's satisfactory completion of contractual obligations. Justice Ananda Sen allowed Eagle Infra India Limited's writ petition and directed Jharkhand Urban Infrastructure Development Company Limited (JUIDCO) to clear the contractor's pending dues under the Harmu River...

Delhi High Court Rules Section 43(3) Of Arbitration Act Cannot Save Void Arbitration Clause

The Delhi High Court has recently held that a provision empowering courts to extend the contractual time for commencing arbitration in cases of undue hardship cannot, by itself, validate a contractual clause that is otherwise void under the law.Referring to Section 43(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court observed,"The provision does not validate or positively enact the enforceability of contractual time-bar clauses. It addresses only the limited question of whether a court...

Delhi High Court Upholds Award In Turner Morrison's Construction Cost Recovery Dispute Against NIRLAC

The Delhi High Court on 16 July held that Courts cannot interfere under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act with an arbitral tribunal's plausible interpretation of a contract merely because another view is possible, while dismissing Turner Morrison Ltd.'s appeal against parts of an award. A Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetrapal and Amit Mahajan upheld the tribunal's interpretation of the Construction Agreement with the Namgyal Institute for Research on Ladakhi Art and...

Delhi High Court Upholds ₹662 Crore Toyo-L&T Award, Says Contract Interpretation Cannot Be Revisited

The Delhi High Court on 15 July upheld an arbitral award of around Rs. 662 crore in favour of the consortium of Toyo Engineering Corporation and Larsen & Toubro Limited, holding that an arbitral tribunal's plausible interpretation of contractual terms cannot be re-examined under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Justice Amit Bansal dismissed the petition filed by Indian Oil Corporation Limited (IOCL) challenging the award, holding that the arbitral tribunal had...

Delhi High Court Upholds Arbitral Award, Says Tribunal Cannot Revisit Merits After Passing Award

The Delhi High Court has held that once an arbitral award is passed, the arbitral tribunal becomes functus officio and cannot reopen the merits of its decision. Its powers thereafter are confined to correcting computational, clerical, typographical, or similar errors. Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar delivered the ruling while dismissing cross-petitions filed by Supreme Advertising Private Limited and Genus Power Infrastructures Limited. The court observed, "Once an award is rendered, the...

Calcutta High Court Upholds Arbitral Award Rejecting ₹205.70 Crore Claims Against KMRCL

The Calcutta High Court on Tuesday dismissed an appeal filed by ITD-ITD CEM Joint Venture and upheld an arbitral award rejecting its claims of about ₹205.70 crore against Kolkata Metro Rail Corporation Ltd (KMRCL). It found no ground to interfere with the tribunal's conclusions or the earlier order refusing to set aside the award. A division bench of Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi upheld the May 8, 2026 judgment of the Single Judge. It held, "We are of the view that the...

Party Cannot Reopen Maintainability Of Fresh Arbitration After Challenging Earlier Award: MP High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has recently held that a party cannot reopen the issue of maintainability at the stage of appointment of an arbitrator after having challenged an earlier arbitral award and after a court permitted fresh arbitration if disputes persisted. The ruling came while the court appointed a fresh arbitrator to adjudicate a dispute between MSP Infrastructures Limited and Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation Ltd. (MPRDCL). Justice Deepak Khot held that the question of...

Bombay High Court Appoints Arbitrator In GE Power-Unistar Dispute Despite Defective Section 21 Notice

The Bombay High Court on 14 July held that a defective notice invoking arbitration does not invalidate the commencement of arbitral proceedings where the arbitration agreement has been invoked and the disputes between the parties are clearly identified. Justice Arun R. Pedneker appointed former Bombay High Court Judge Justice Anuja Prabhudessai as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between Unistar Metals Private Limited and GE Power Limited under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and...