Supreme Court
Non-Signatory Which Isn't A Veritable Party Cannot Invoke Arbitration Clause : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (December 9) held that a non-signatory to an arbitration agreement cannot invoke the arbitration clause against a party with whom it shares no legal relationship and where there is no indication of any intention to bind the non-signatory to the main contract. A bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K.V. Viswanathan heard the matter, where the Respondent, admittedly a non-signatory to the primary contract between HPCL and AGC Networks Ltd., sought to invoke the...
If Arbitral Tribunal Terminates Proceedings For Not Paying Fees, Remedy Is To Seek Recall & Then Invoke S.14(2) : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has held that an arbitral tribunal is legally empowered to terminate proceedings under Section 38(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 when a party fails to pay its share of the arbitrator's fees.Once such a termination occurs, the remedy available to the party is to seek the recall of the order before the Tribunal itself. If the recall application is dismissed, then the party has to approach the Court under Section 14(2).A bench of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice...
Supreme Court Refers 'Bharat Drilling' Judgment' To Larger Bench For Clarity Whether Prohibited Claims Bind Arbitral Tribunals
The Supreme Court on Friday referred its 2009 judgment in Bharat Drilling and Foundation Treatment Private Limited versus State of Jharkhand (2009) 16 SCC 705. to a larger bench, observing that the ruling has been repeatedly and incorrectly relied upon to dilute prohibitory clauses in government contracts. A bench of Justice P S Narasimha and Justice A S Chandurkar said the earlier decision is not an authority for the proposition that excepted or prohibited claim clauses bind only the...
Arbitration | Agreed Interest Rate Can't Be Later Challenged As Exorbitant; Arbitrator Cannot Overrride Contractual Rate : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Wednesday dismissed appeals filed by BPL Limited against an arbitral award, upholding the enforcement of a 36% annual interest rate on outstanding dues owed to Morgan Securities and Credits Private Limited. The Court ruled that corporate entities cannot claim contractual terms are "unconscionable" after voluntarily agreeing to them ..“Once the parties by mutual consent agreed to a particular rate of interest to be charged and the same is included in the terms of the contract...
PSU Objects To International Arbitration Being Moved From Delhi To London; Supreme Court Questions Change Of Venue For Convenience
The Supreme Court on Wednesday heard a dispute between NMDC Steel Ltd, a Public Sector Undertaking of the Government of India and Italian company Danieli & C. Officine, regarding the shifting of the place of hearing of the international arbitration between them from Delhi to London.The bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice NK Singh was hearing a Special Leave Petition filed by NDMC Steel Ltd against the order of the Telangana High Court which...
Arbitration | No Review Or Appeal Lies Against Order Appointing Arbitrator : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court observed that a review or appeal from an order of appointment of an arbitrator is impermissible.“Once an arbitrator is appointed, the arbitral process must proceed unhindered. There is no statutory provision for review or appeal from an order under Section 11, which reflects a conscious legislative choice.”, the Court held, while setting aside the Patna High Court's order allowing the review petition and recalling its earlier appointment of an arbitrator, despite the party...
Arbitration | Unconditional Stay On Execution Of Award Only In Exceptional Cases: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recently declined to grant an unconditional stay on the execution of the arbitral award, holding that the requirement to deposit the security amount was justified since the award was not shown to have been induced or tainted by fraud or corruption. Referring to its latest ruling in Lifestyle Equities C.V. and Another v. Amazon Technologies Inc., a bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan reiterated that for the grant of an unconditional stay on the execution of an...
Indian Courts Have No Jurisdiction To Appoint Arbitrator For Foreign-Seated Arbitration : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Friday (November 21) dismissed a plea seeking the appointment of an arbitrator in an international commercial arbitration, holding that once the principal contract is governed by foreign law and provides for a foreign-seated arbitration, Indian courts lose jurisdiction, irrespective of the Indian nationality of any party. “Indian Courts have no jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator for a foreign-seated arbitration, irrespective of the nationality or domicile of the...
Arbitration | Dispute On Interest Rate Doesn't Fall Under Public Policy Ground To Set Aside Award Ordinarily: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Tuesday (November 18) upheld the charging of a 24% interest rate in an arbitral award, stating that an interest rate agreed upon in a commercial loan agreement did not violate the fundamental policy of Indian law. “It is well-settled that fundamental policy of Indian law does not refer to violation of any Statue but fundamental principles on which Indian law is founded. Any difference or controversy as to rate of interest clearly falls outside the scope of challenge on...
'Arbitrator Interpreted Contract Contrary To Railway Policies' : Supreme Court Sets Aside Award Against IRCTC
The Supreme Court on Friday (November 7) set aside the multi-crore arbitral award passed against the Indian Railways Catering and Tourism Corporation Limited (“IRCTC”), holding that the arbitrator had impermissibly "rewritten the contract" between the parties. “Rewriting a contract for the parties would be a breach of the fundamental principles of justice, entitling a Court to interfere as it would shock its conscience and would fall within the exceptional category.”, the Court observed....
Mere Use Of Word 'Arbitration' Does Not Create Arbitration Agreement Unless Parties Clearly Intend So: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court upheld the Punjab and Haryana High Court's decision refusing to refer the dispute to arbitration, observing that the mere use of the term “arbitration” in a clause is not sufficient to mandate reference to arbitration unless the parties clearly intended to resolve their disputes through arbitration. “mere use of the word 'arbitration” is not sufficient to treat the clause as an arbitration agreement when the corresponding mandatory intent to refer the disputes to arbitration...
Arbitration | Objections To Arbitral Award Execution Maintainable Only If Decree Is Void Or Without Jurisdiction : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday (November 3) ruled against the stalling of the enforcement of an arbitral award at the execution stage, reiterating that the objections against the execution of an award lie in a narrow compass, such as only when a decree is inherently void or passed without jurisdiction. A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and K.V. Viswanathan upheld the Delhi High Court's decision dismissing Appellant-MMTC's objections under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure and its...