Arbitrator's Mandate Not Automatically Terminated By Expiry Of Indicative Timeline: Delhi High Court

On 30 September, the Delhi High Court held that an arbitrator's mandate does not end merely because an indicative time period fixed by the Court for completing proceedings has expired, unless the direction imposed a mandatory deadline. A Division Bench comprising Justices Avneesh Jhingan and Shail Jain dismissed M.K. Construction's appeal against an arbitral award in its residential construction dispute with Maj. Gen. Hoshiar Singh (Retd). It observed: “The direction of this Court did not...

Word 'Arbitration' In Brief Clause Can Be Sufficient To Show Intention To Arbitrate: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has held that a brief arbitration clause can constitute a valid and binding arbitration agreement even when it does not use words such as “shall” or “will” to expressly require disputes to be referred to arbitration.Justice Amit Borkar observed, “The Court is not adding the word 'shall' to the contract as a new term. The Court is trying to understand the words already written in the Purchase Order in their ordinary commercial setting. The word 'Arbitration', along with the...

2015 Amendment To Arbitration Act Cannot Invalidate Pre-Amendment Arbitrator Appointment: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has held that the statutory ineligibility introduced for arbitrators by the 2015 amendment to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, cannot be retrospectively applied to invalidate an appointment made before the amendment came into force.A Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetrapal and Bharat Parashar upheld the appointment of a serving Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) employee as sole arbitrator.The arbitration was invoked on June 3, 2014 and the arbitrator was...

Acquiring Property Interest Alone Does Not Bind Transferee To Arbitration Clause: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on 7 September held that acquiring an interest in property covered by a Development Agreement, by itself, does not make a transferee a party to the arbitration agreement contained in the Development Agreement. Justice Amit Borakar added that a transferee can become bound by the arbitration clause only where material shows assignment, incorporation, acceptance or unequivocal adoption of the underlying agreement, and appointed a sole arbitrator for disputes between the...

Arbitral Tribunal Cannot Permit PBG Appropriation Contrary To Contractual Terms: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court on 31 August held that an arbitral tribunal cannot permit appropriation of Performance Bank Guarantee (PBG) proceeds contrary to the contractual terms governing the parties. Justice Avneesh Jhingan was hearing a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 filed by ISGEC Heavy Engineering Limited challenging an arbitral award arising from its dispute with Prakash Industries Limited. The Bench observed: “The tribunal permitting appropriation of...

Madras HC Refuses Arbitrator Appointment Over Forged Clause, Says Arbitration Is 'Child Of Consent'

The Madras High Court on 25 September refused to appoint an arbitrator in an employment dispute between former Purchase Manager Chandramouli V. and the American International School Chennai, holding that a challenge to the genuineness of the document containing the arbitration clause goes to the root of whether an Arbitral Tribunal can be constituted. Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari observed that arbitration, being the “child of consent,” cannot proceed where the very document...

Delhi High Court Declines 'Eleventh Hour' Auditor Appointment In Hamdard Tax Row, Allows Arbitration

On 29 September, the Delhi High Court refused to appoint an independent statutory auditor in a dispute concerning the renewal of Hamdard Laboratories India's tax-exempt registration and instead permitted Hammad Ahmed to seek appropriate directions from the arbitral tribunal. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela found that the objections to Form 10AB were intertwined with a property segregation dispute already pending before the arbitral tribunal, and stated that appointing an independent auditor at the...

Only 2 Days Left Of 90-Day Restraint, Karnataka HC Dismisses Appeals Against Interim Order In Arbitration Case

The Karnataka High Court has dismissed three appeals challenging an interim restraint on dealings with a property in Bengaluru Rural District, holding that there was no point examining the challenges when only two days remained before the 90-day protection was due to expire.A Division Bench of Justice D.K. Singh and Justice H. Shanthi Bhushan, in an order dated September 11, noted that the restraint imposed by the Commercial Court on June 15 would expire on September 13.The bench, therefore,...

Communication On Company Letterhead Not Enough To Establish Consent To Arbitrate: Bombay High Court

Today, the Bombay High Court held that use of a company's letterhead in project-related communications does not by itself make the company a party to another company's contract or establish its consent to the arbitration clause. Justice Amit Borkar made the observation while referring the dispute between New Consolidated Construction Company Limited (NCCCL) and Limitless Contracting Private Limited concerning construction works at the “One Park Avenue” project in Kolshet, Thane, to arbitration,...

Delhi High Court Appoints Arbitrator, Local Commissioner In Amazon-Goodluck ₹182.50 Cr. Lease Dispute

The Delhi High Court on 28 September appointed a Local Commissioner to inspect and prepare an inventory of Amazon Seller Services Private Limited's assets lying at premises leased from Goodluck Buildtech Private Limited. Justice Om Prakash Shukla also appointed former Supreme Court judge Justice S. Ravindra Bhat as sole arbitrator to adjudicate the lease dispute between the two parties, involving an indemnity claim of approximately Rs. 182.50 crore and fixtures and fit-outs stated to be worth...

Arbitral Tribunal Can't Reject Interim Relief Merely For Overlap With Final Relief: Delhi High Court

On 28 September, the Delhi High Court held that an arbitral tribunal cannot reject interim relief under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 merely because the relief sought overlaps with or is co-extensive with the final relief claimed in the arbitration. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela allowed an appeal filed by Wello Retail Pvt. Ltd. against an order passed by the arbitrator rejecting its application under Section 17 of the Act. The Bench observed: “At times, and having due...

Service Rule Cannot By Itself Make Consumer Commission President Ineligible As Arbitrator: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has ruled that a restriction in the service rules governing the President of a State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission cannot, by itself, make the person ineligible to act as an arbitrator under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (A&C Act).A division bench of Justice Anil Khetarpal and Justice Shail Jain observed relying on ruln in Delhi Integrated Multi Modal Transit Systems Ltd. ruled, “A breach of a condition governing the office...