Multiple Agreements Forming Part Of Same Commercial Project Can Be Referred To Single Arbitration: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court recently held that various agreements entered into between the parties forming part of the same commercial project can be referred to Arbitration, and one arbitrator can be appointed to adjudicate all the disputes arising from the various agreements. The Bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal, while hearing a petition u/s 11 of the A&C Act, moved by Adani Enterprise Ltd. (“Petitioner”) held that the General Condition of Contracts (“GCC”) and the General...

Arbitral Award Without Corroboration Of Claim Certificate Patently Illegal: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that when there is no appearance of a qualified person to corroborate the claim certificate, the arbitral award suffers patent illegality.A Division Bench of Chief Justice G.S. Sandhawalia and Justice Ranjan Sharma remarked that: “In the absence of corroboration of the certificate… and any qualified person putting in appearance, the award of ₹3.82 crore along with lease money is arbitrary and constitutes patent illegality.”The Court partly...

Future Coupons Moves Delhi High Court Against SIAC Award In Favour Of Amazon

Kishore Biyani led Future Coupons Private Limited (FCPL) has moved the Delhi High Court challenging the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) award that directed the company and its promoters to pay Rs 23.7 crore in damages, along with arbitration and litigation costs, to Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC.A Single Bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh, after counsel for Future Coupons submitted that the parties are in settlement talks, adjourned the matter to January 19 for further...

Order Passed By Emergency Arbitrator Under DIAC Rules 2023 Can Only Remain In Operation For 90 Days: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court, while hearing an appeal u/s 37 of the A&C Act filed against the the Award dated 11.12.2024 (“Impugned Award”) passed by the Emergency Arbitrator under the Delhi International Arbitration Center (Arbitration Proceedings) Rules, 2023 (“Rules of 2023”) observed that the terms 'Emergency Arbitrator' and 'Arbitral Tribunal' are not interchangeable. Rule 14.11 of the Rules of 2023 bars the Emergency Arbitrator from being a part of the Arbitral Tribunal, except...

Arbitral Award In One Proceeding Can Be Used As Evidence In Another: Allahabad High Court Upholds ₹126 Cr Award To Adani

The Allahabad High Court has held that an arbitral award given in one proceedings can be used as evidence in other arbitral proceedings, though the weightage given to it may vary on case to case basis.While dealing with an arbitral award of more than Rs. 126 crores in favour of Adani Enterprises Ltd., the bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh held“An Arbitral Award, which is placed on record of another arbitral proceedings, can be a highly important piece of evidence....

Casual Absence Of Govt Officials Not “Sufficient Cause” To Condone Delay In Challenging Arbitral Award: HP High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has dismissed an application filed by the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board seeking condonation of delay in filing objections against an arbitral award passed in favour of HCL Infotech Ltd., holding that bureaucratic delays and internal movement of files do not constitute sufficient cause for delay.Rejecting the State's contention, the Court remarked that: “The Decision with regard to filing of objections, approval whereof ultimately...

Balco Disinvestment: Delhi High Court Upholds Arbitral Award Voiding Centre & Vedanta Shareholder's Pact

After over a decade of legal tussle, the Delhi High Court recently upheld an arbitral award declaring the Shareholders' Agreement (SHA) between Vedanta Limited (then Sterlite Industries) and the Union of India void, which had given Vedanta the exclusive right to buy the government's remaining 49% stake in Bharat Aluminium Company Limited (BALCO) after a three-year lock-in period. The court agreed with the arbitral tribunal that the agreement's clauses restricting the sale of shares violated...

Petition U/S 34 A&C Act Filed With Deficit Court Fee Is Non-Est Unless Paid Within Limitation Period: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court held that filing of a petition with deficit court fee does not amount to proper presentation. If the entire court fee is not deposited within the limitation period under section 34(3) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), the court is divested of its power to condone the delay. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh held that "filing of a petition with deficit Court fee cannot be construed as proper presentation of the petition. If such presentation of the...

Test Of Prejudice Irrelevant When Tribunal Is Constituted Without Consent Of JV Partner: Madras High Court Sets Aside Arbitral Award

The Madras High Court set aside an arbitral award passed against M/s Nilakantan & Brothers Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (“the petitioner”) on the ground that since the arbitral tribunal was constituted without obtaining the consent of a Joint Venture Partner, it lacked jurisdiction. The court further held that the appointment cannot be validated merely on the ground that no prejudice would be caused to a party. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh held that “the Tribunal did not go into this...

Appeal Against Order U/S 39(2) Arbitration Act Is Not Maintainable U/S 13 Commercial Courts Act: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court dismissed an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), holding that no appeal under section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act lies against an order passed under section 39(2) of the Act. The court further held that the appeal under section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act is maintainable against those orders enumerated under Order 43 of the CPC or under section 37 of the Act and that section 39(2) does not fall within...

Award Passed After Expiry Of Arbitrator's Mandate Is Non-Est, Court Can't Extend Mandate Post-Award: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court held that an award passed after expiry of the arbitrator's mandate is non-est and unforceable holding that the court has no power to extend the mandate post award if no application seeking extension of the mandate was pending before the award was passed. A Division bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Vinod Kumar held that the award becomes operational only when it is written,dated and signed by the arbitrator giving reasons on which it is based and the...

Order Terminating Arbitration For Non-Filing Of Statement Of Claim Is Not 'Award', Cannot Be Challenged U/S 34 A&C Act: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court held that an order terminating arbitral proceedings under section 25 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) on account of non-filing of statement of claim does not amount to an arbitral award and therefore cannot be challenged under section 34. Justice Jasmeet Singh held that “the Award can only be considered to be an award once it adjudicates the rights of the parties. The order terminating the proceedings for non-filing of a statement of...