Bombay High Court
Arbitrator Cannot Be Substituted U/S 29A(6) Of A&C Act Unless Grounds Mentioned U/S 14 & 15 Are Satisfied: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has held that even though the term "substitution" is mentioned under Section 29-A(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), an arbitrator cannot be substituted in an application under this section unless the grounds specified in Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration Act are satisfied, which outline the conditions under which an arbitrator may be substituted. Brief Facts: These Petitions have been...
Bombay HC Dismisses Appeal Against Order U/S 9 Of Arbitration Act Injuncting Owner Of Kapani Resorts From Disposing Of Interest In Properties
The Bombay High Court bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe And Justice M. S. Karnik has upheld the order passed by the Single Judge under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), injuncting the owner of the Kailash property and Kapani Resorts from alienating or disposing of any interest in the properties until the completion of the arbitral proceedings. Brief Facts: The present appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act has been filed against an...
Deletion Of Names Through Chamber Summons Does Not Render Appeal U/S 50(1)(B) Of A&C Act As Not Maintainable: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court bench of Justices A.S. Chandurkar and M.M. Sathaye has observed that when a common arbitration petition seeking recognition, enforcement and execution of a foreign award is declined against all the respondents, the mere fact that some respondents had successfully filed chamber summons seeking deletion of their names would not render the appeal filed under Section 50(1)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as not maintainable. Facts The present...
Unilateral Option To Terminate Arbitration Agreement Does Not Render It Illegal: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court Bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan while disposing an application for appointment of arbitrator has observed that an arbitration clause which gives option to only one party to opt out of the arbitration agreement is not invalid per se. Such arbitration agreement can be saved by eliminating the unilateral option or by making such right bilateral. Facts The present applications have been filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996...
Amalgamated Company Can Adjust Written Down Assets Of Constituent Companies & Claim Depreciation Without Central Govt Approval: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court stated that amalgamated company can adjust written down of assets of amalgamating companies and claim depreciation without central government's approval. The Division Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice M.S. Karnik stated that “The Tribunal was not justified in law in holding that in view of insertion of Section 72A in the Income Tax Act, 1961, the assessee (being the amalgamated company) not having obtained approval of the Central Government was not...
Objections To Terms Of Redevelopment Agreement Can't Be Adjudicated By Court U/S 9 Of Arbitration Act: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has held that objections related to the terms of the redevelopment agreement raised by members of the society can be decided only by the appropriate forum having jurisdiction over such issues. These matters cannot be adjudicated under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act). Brief Facts: This Petition has been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act in relation to a Development...
Unless Serious Allegations Of Fraud Are Established, Parties Cannot Be Denied Reference To Arbitration U/S 8 Of A&C Act: Bombay HC
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice N. J. Jamadar has held that the dispute cannot be refused referral to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) based solely on mere allegations of fraud simpliciter, unless serious allegations of fraud that go to the root of the partnership deed containing the arbitration clause are established. Brief Facts: The Petitioner-Defendant No.2, Respondent No.3-Defendant No.3 and Narayan Tiwari, the...
Statutory Protection Under Maharashtra Rent Control Act Can't Be Circumvented By Invoking Arbitration Petition To Seek 'Speedy Eviction': High Court
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has held that the jurisdiction under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) cannot be invoked to circumvent the statutory protection afforded to tenants under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999 (“Rent Act”). Interim measures under Section 9 must aid arbitral proceedings and cannot override or conflict with special statutory mechanisms under the Rent Act for eviction and redevelopment. The Court ...
No Bar On Arbitrator To Allow Withdrawal Of Claims Provided Legitimate Interests Of Other Party Are Not Prejudiced: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court bench of Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Dr. Neela Gokhale has held that the arbitrator can allow the parties to withdraw their claims to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings by issuing a new notice of arbitration, provided that the legitimate interests of the other party are not prejudiced. Brief Facts: An agreement was executed between the Petitioner, in the lead Petition i.e. Ketan Shah and Anugrah Stock & Broking Private Limited ('Anugrah') as a...
Limitation Cannot Be Decided As Preliminary Issue Without Recording Whether It Is A Mixed Question Of Law And Fact: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice M.S. Karnik has held that an arbitrator is not permitted to decide the issue of limitation as a preliminary issue without first recording a finding as to whether it is a mixed question of law and fact that requires evidence to be led. It further held that if such a finding is not recorded and the issue is nonetheless decided as a preliminary issue, the award can be set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration and...
Bombay High Court Directs Developer Of Lodha Worli Towers To Collect Maintenance At Rate Agreed Upon Between Parties Until Arbitral Proceedings Are Completed
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan the developer of Lodha World Towers in a petition filed under section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) has been directed to charge the Federation Common Area Maintenance (FCAM) Charges at the rate agreed upon in the agreement executed between the parties, until the arbitral proceedings are completed. Brief Facts: This group of petitions have been filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act ...
Tenants Occupying Premises Which Fall Under Development Agreement Cannot Be Evicted U/S 9 Of Arbitration Act: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has held that Eviction of tenants governed by the Rent Control Act cannot be sought under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), particularly when they are not parties to the Development Agreement executed between the Developer and the Landlords and are not being provided upgraded premises in the redeveloped building compared to what they currently occupy under the tenancy agreements. Brief...