Bombay High Court
Limitation For Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act Is Governed By Article 116 Of Limitation Act, Delay Not To Be Condoned In Mechanical Manner: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has held that the delay in filing an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 (“Arbitration Act”) should not be condoned in a mechanical manner as it would defeat the very objective of the Arbitration Act which is to provide a speedy resolution of disputes. It also held that as per judgment of the Supreme Court in Executive Engineer v. Borse Brothers Engineers and Contractors Private Limited (2021),...
When There Is Ambiguity In Arbitration Agreement, Business Efficacy Test Can Applied To Discern Intent Of Parties To Arbitrate: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has held that when there is an ambiguity in the agreement with respect to arbitration related provisions, the business efficacy test can be applied to discern true intent of the parties to arbitrate. Brief Facts: The present petition has been filed under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) seeking appointment of an Arbitrator. A Hotel Franchisee and Management Agreement (“Resort...
Mandate Of Facilitation Council Is Not Terminated Even If It Fails To Render Award Within 90 Days U/S 18(5) Of MSME Act: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has held that the mandate of the MSME Facilitation Council (Council) cannot be terminated merely on the ground that it failed to render an award within 90 days under section 18(5) of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (“MSME Act”) from the date of entering reference as this time period is directory in nature. Brief Facts: In this Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,...
Notice Issued To Non-Existing Entity Post-Merger Is Substantive Illegality, Dept Cannot Cite Technical Glitch: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court stated that notice issued to a non-existing entity post-merger is a substantive illegality and not some procedural violation. “we cannot condone the fundamental error in issuing the impugned notices against a non-existing company despite full knowledge of the merger. The impugned notices, which are non-est cannot be treated as “good” as urged on behalf of the department” stated the Division Bench of Justices M.S. Sonak and Jitendra Jain. In this case, the...
Bombay HC 'Disappointed' With CBI & Mumbai Police Showing Reluctance To Probe Multi-Crore Money Laundering Case; Orders Formation Of SIT
The Bombay High Court recently expressed 'disappointment' over the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and also the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of the Mumbai Police, both showing 'reluctance' to investigate into the complaints of multi-crore fraud by a company both in India and also several foraging countries.A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan noted that both the EOW as well as the CBI, for the reasons best known to these Agencies, were reluctant to...
While Commercial Speech Falls Within Free Speech, Contract Prohibit Adverse Remarks: Bombay HC Imposes 90-Day Injunction On Wonderchef's Distributor
Observing that commercial speech is a part of 'free speech' guaranteed by the Constitution of India, the Bombay High Court imposed a 90-day injunction against an Australia-based distributor of Wonderchef Home Appliances, owned by Celebrity Chef Sanjeev Kapoor, from making any comments or communications which could harm the reputation of the company, due to a contractual clause preventing them from doing so.Single-judge Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan while imposing the injunction, also ordered...
Court Cannot Assume Jurisdiction To Appoint Arbitrator Unless Request For Reference Of Dispute Is Received By Respondent: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice R. M. Joshi has held that compliance with Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is mandatory and that the court cannot assume jurisdiction to appoint an Arbitrator under Section 11 unless a request for a reference of dispute is received by the respondent. Brief Facts: The dispute arose with respect to a sub-contract between the parties. Clause No. 32 of the sub-contract provides for the settlement of dispute amicably and, on...
Bombay High Court Refuses To Stay Release Of Akshay Kumar's 'Sky Force'
The Bombay High Court on Thursday refused to grant any ad-interim order to stay the release of Akshay Kumar - starrer 'Sky Force' film, which is expected to hit the screens from Friday (January 24).Single-judge Justice Manish Pitale noted that the plaintiff Sandeep Gangatkar, who claimed that the film's theme has breached his copyright work titled 'Free Bird' which he created in 2014 and shared with the makers of the film. The judge noted that the teaser of the film was out in public domain ever...
Serving Signed Copy Of Award To Employee Of Party Does Not Constitute Valid Service U/S 31(5) Of Arbitration Act: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court bench of Justices A.S. Chandurkar and Rajesh S. Patil has held that service of a signed copy of an award on an employee of a party to an arbitration agreement is not a valid service under section 31(5) of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts The respondent and the appellant had business dealings. Dispute arose between them and an arbitration clause was invoked. The arbitrator passed an award granting relief to the claimant. The appellants argued that they were...
Substantive Objections On Validity Or Existence Of Arbitration Agreement Can Be Adjudicated By Tribunal U/S 16 Of Act: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has held that substantive objections concerning the validity and existence of an arbitration agreement can be adjudicated by the Arbitral Tribunal and not by the court under section 11 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts This is a Petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) seeking to refer disputes and differences that have arisen between the parties in connection with an agreement...
Belated Filing Of Form 9A Is Not Attributable To Trust: Bombay HC Allows Exemption U/S 11 After Condoning Delay Under IT Act
The Bombay High Court held that bonafide delay in filing Form 9A on part of trust, has to be construed as procedural lapse and shall be condoned by exercising powers u/s 119(2) of Income tax Act.The Division Bench of Justice G S Kulkarni and Justice Advait M Sethna observed that that the jurisdictional AO completely lost sight of the fact that at the time when assessee claimed deductions towards depreciation and capital expenditure u/s 11(1) by filing the revised computation, the time limit for...
S.147 Of IT Act Doesn't Postulate Review Jurisdiction Such That Assessment Can Be Reviewed By AO Intending To Form Different Opinion: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court ruled that the materials which were already available before AO and which ultimately were considered in passing assessment order u/s 143(3), cannot form basis of reopening, on ground that such materials were ignored in finalizing assessment.Section 147 does not postulate review jurisdiction, so that assessment can be reviewed by the Assessing Officer intending to form different and/or a new opinion, added the Court. The Division Bench of Justice G S Kulkarni and Justice...