Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Restraint On Arbitrator, Stresses Limited Judicial Intervention In Arbitration

The Calcutta High Court on Friday set aside an order of the Darjeeling District Judge restraining a Sole Arbitrator from proceeding with a pending application under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that courts must exercise restraint in interfering with an ongoing arbitral process.A bench of Justice Ravi Kishan Kapur and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya was hearing an appeal against an order of the District Judge, Darjeeling, in a dispute between family...

Tata Motors Finance 'Took Law In Its Hands' By Acting On Ex Parte Arbitral Award To Auction Truck: Patna High Court

The Patna High Court has held that Tata Motors Finance Limited could not proceed against a borrower's commercial vehicle on the basis of an ex parte arbitral award without following the prescribed enforcement process.Justice Girijish Kumar observed that the finance company had failed to act under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and had “taken the law in its hand," which was impermissible.Section 36 requires an enforceable arbitral award to be enforced in the same manner...

Delhi High Court Says Failed Conciliation Talks Cannot Be Used To Decide Arbitration Claims

The Delhi High Court has ruled that material recorded during unsuccessful conciliation cannot later be relied upon to decide the same dispute in arbitration. Justice Avneesh Jhingan observed that the confidentiality of such proceedings must continue even after a settlement attempt fails.“The proceedings during conciliation cannot be considered and relied upon in case the arbitration of dispute is necessitated. The proceedings during conciliation are different but when an issue is contested equal...

Period Of Judicially Foreclosed Arbitral Award Execution Excluded From Limitation: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court on 7 September held that the period during which execution of an arbitral award was practically unavailable due to binding judicial precedent cannot be counted for computing the limitation period. Justice Gaurang Kanth allowed Steel Authority of India Limited's (SAIL) execution petition, holding that the period from 29 February 2008 to 22 October 2015 had to be excluded while computing the 12-year limitation period. The Bench held:“To hold that limitation ran...

Incidental Civil Construction Doesn't Make Waste Management Contract A Works Contract: Madhya Pradesh HC

The Madhya Pradesh High Court on 3 September reiterated that a waste management contract does not become a “works contract” merely because it involves incidental civil construction, and that disputes arising from such a contract can be referred to arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Justice Deepak Khot allowed Susajja JV Anand LLP's application against Bhopal Municipal Corporation and appointed former Calcutta High Court Chief Justice Sujoy Paul as the sole arbitrator...

Execution Court's Finding That Arbitral Award Is Unenforceable Does Not Extend Limitation: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has ruled that the time spent in an earlier arbitration cannot be excluded from the limitation period merely because an execution court later finds that the resulting arbitral award is unenforceable or a nullity.Section 43(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, provides for exclusion of the period between the commencement of an arbitration and the date on which a court sets aside the arbitral award while calculating the limitation period for subsequent...

Calcutta High Court Rejects Reliance Jute Mills' ₹1.09 Cr. Claim Against Over Interest On Interest

The Calcutta High Court on 27 August dismissed Reliance Jute Mills (International) Ltd's execution petition seeking an additional Rs. 1.09 crore from The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd, after finding that Reliance had already received Rs. 8.76 crore under the arbitral award dated 2 March 2020. Justice Gaurang Kanth held that the amount already paid, together with accrued interest, exceeded the amount payable under the award and that Reliance could not claim further interest by treating accrued...

Interim Return Of Property Can Support Arbitration Without Granting Final Relief: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on 27 August held that directing the return of property as an interim measure does not amount to granting final relief where the direction is intended to protect and support arbitral proceedings. Justice Amit Borkar partly allowed a petition filed by Limited Liability Company “LTB” seeking interim protection in respect of its tank containers and directed their release, while leaving the parties' substantive claims open for appropriate proceedings. He held: “I do not...

IBC Resolution Ends Pre-Resolution Claims, Arbitration Cannot Continue: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has recently held that once a corporate debtor is resolved under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, there is no residual cause of action from a pre-resolution claim that can be pursued through arbitration or Section 9 proceedings.Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan observed that the insolvency resolution process brings such claims to an end, whether the creditor recovers some, none or all of the amount claimed. The court held, “That a corporate debtor who is resolved under the...

Co-operative Bank Can Initiate Arbitration Without Specific Managing Committee Authorisation: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court has held that a co-operative society's failure to produce a Managing Committee resolution before the Arbitrator does not invalidate arbitration proceedings initiated by the society. The court ruled that the requirement under Rule 67(2) of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Rules, 1969, is directory and not mandatory“However, I am of the opinion that, though the word 'shall' is used in Rule 67(2) of the 1969 Rules, the provision cannot be construed as mandatory, and it can...

30-Day Limit For Correcting Award Is Inflexible, Applies To NH Act Arbitration: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has held that the 30-day limit for seeking correction or interpretation of an arbitral award cannot be extended, and a belated application cannot revive the time limit for challenging the award, including in arbitrations under the National Highways Act, 1956.A Division Bench of Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice K.S. Hemalekha dismissed an appeal filed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) against the 13 February 2026 order of the Principal District and...

Delhi High Court Refers Flemingo-AAI Dispute To Arbitration, Says Conditional Notice Is Not Invocation

The Delhi High Court on 7 September referred a dispute between Flemingo (DFS) Private Limited and the Airports Authority of India (AAI) concerning the operation of duty-free shops at Amritsar Airport to arbitration. Justice Jasmeet Singh appointed Justice Shalinder Kaur (Retd.) as the sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes, holding that Flemingo's earlier communications did not amount to invocation of arbitration and that its petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation...