Dispute Cannot Be Referred To Arbitration When Arbitration Agreement Itself Is Alleged To Be Forged: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Monday observed that disputes cannot be referred to arbitration when the very existence of the arbitration agreement is in question, particularly where the document relied upon is alleged to be forged. A bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe said courts must first satisfy themselves that an arbitration agreement actually exists before sending parties to arbitration. The court clarified that challenges going to the root of the arbitration...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Digest [26th January - 1st February, 2026]

Nominal Index Jan De Nul Dredging India Pvt. Ltd. v. Tuticorin Port Trust, 2026 LLBiz SC 15Jagdeep Chowgule v. Sheela Chowgule and Ors, 2026 LLBiz SC 30 M/s Angel One Limited v. S.X.J. Vasan, 2026 LLBiz HC (MAD) 30M/s Ramacivil India Construction Pvt. Ltd. v. Central Public Works Department, 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 77Arun Mehrotra Versus Kishan Lal, 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 85 To ReaVedanta Limited v. Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation Ltd., 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 88IFFCO TOKIO General Insurance...

Only Civil Court Can Extend Arbitration Time Even When Arbitrator Is Appointed By High Court: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has held that an application seeking extension of time for an arbitral tribunal under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act lies before the civil court, even in cases where the High Court has appointed the arbitrator. The court clarified that the High Court's role ends with the appointment of the arbitrator and does not continue during the arbitration. A Bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice R. Mahadevan said the jurisdiction exercised by a...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 19th January-25th January 2026

Nominal Index1. Prakash Atlanta (JV) vs National Highways Authority of India, 2026 LLBiz SC 172. Jan De Nul Dredging India Pvt. Ltd. v. Tuticorin Port Trust, 2026 LLBiz SC 153. E-City Real Estates Pvt Ltd & Anr. vs IMAX Corporation & Ors., 2026 LLBiz SC 224. Steel Authority Of India Ltd. v. M/S R Haranadha Reddy, 2026 LLBiz HC (MP) 95. Maverick Developer And Colonizers Pvt. Ltd. v. Project Officer, 2026 LLBiz HC (MP) 86. Ashutosh Infra Pvt. Ltd. v. Pebble Downtown India Pvt. Ltd....

Appellate Courts Cannot Disturb Arbitral Awards Merely To Permit A Different View, Supreme Court Reiterates

The Supreme Court, recently, set aside a Madras High Court order that had deleted compensation awarded to a dredging contractor and reiterated that appellate courts cannot interfere with arbitral awards merely because they prefer a different interpretation of the contract. A Bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Pankaj Mithal held that courts hearing appeals in arbitration matters have a narrow and limited role. Once an arbitral award has been examined and found free from...

Supreme Court Orders Status Quo, Asset Disclosure In IMAX–E-City Arbitration Dispute

The Supreme Court on Friday ordered the E-City group to maintain status quo over all its assets and disclose details of its movable and immovable properties while taking up a fresh challenge to the Bombay High Court's decision that revived enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in favour of IMAX Corporation. A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and K V Viswanathan issued notice on a special leave petition filed by E-City Real Estates Pvt. Ltd. and another group entity, challenging the Bombay High...

Welfare Boards For Building And Construction Workers Mandatory Before Levy Of Cess: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has recently held that the constitution of Welfare Boards under the Building and Other Construction Workers Act, 1996 (BOCW), is a mandatory precondition for the effective levy and collection of cess under the Building and Other Construction Workers' Welfare Cess Act, 1996The court ruled that in the absence of such Welfare Boards, cess could neither have been validly levied nor collected, as the statutory scheme under both enactments presupposes the existence of a functional...

Courts Cannot Substitute Plausible Arbitral View Merely Because Another Is Possible: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has reiterated that courts should exercise minimal interference with arbitral awards and cannot substitute an arbitral tribunal's interpretation of a contract merely because another view is possible. The court also held that although the Building and Other Construction Workers Act, 1996 (BOCW Act) and the Welfare Cess Act were brought into force in the mid-1990s, they could not be given effect to for several years due to the failure of governments to constitute statutory...

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round Up: 11th January To 18th January, 2026

NOMINAL INDEX Bhagheeratha Engineering Ltd. v. State of Kerala, 2026 LLBiz SC 5Motilal Oswal Financial Services Limited v. Santosh Cordeiro & Anr., 2026 LLBiz SC 4Black Gold Resources Private Limitada v. International Coal Ventures Pvt. Ltd & Anr., 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 41Om Prakash v. Smt Laxmi Maurya, 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 54Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited v. Delkon India Pvt. Ltd., 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 36 National Highways Authority of India v. Roadway Solutions India Infra Limited,...

Parties Cannot Rely On Pre-Arbitration Steps They Frustrated: Supreme Court

The top court made the observation while restoring a Rs 1.99 crore arbitration award against the State of Kerala

Courts Cannot Decide Arbitrability While Appointing Arbitrators: Supreme Court Dismisses Motilal Oswal's Appeal

The Supreme Court of India recently held that courts cannot decide questions of arbitrability while appointing arbitrators, even when a party relies on a special statute to oppose arbitration. At the Section 11 stage, the court said judges are required to “confine to the examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement” and nothing beyond that. On that basis, the court dismissed an appeal filed by Motilal Oswal Financial Services Limited challenging the appointment of an...

S. 37 Arbitration | Arbitral Awards Not Liable To Set Aside On Mere Error In Law Or Misappreciation Of Evidence : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Thursday (December 18) overturned the Chhattisgarh High Court's judgment, holding that the High Court had exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by effectively acting as an appellate court, re-appreciating the evidence, and substituting its own interpretation in place of the arbitral award. “High Court, in exercise of limited jurisdiction under Section 37, impermissibly re-appreciated facts and substituted its own...