Professional Engagement With Law Firm Does Not Disqualify Advocate From Acting As Arbitrator: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that an Advocate who has accepted briefs from a law firm for unrelated clients cannot, by that fact alone, be deemed ineligible to act as an Arbitrator in disputes involving parties not personally known to or represented by him, even if the same law firm appears in the arbitration. Brief Facts: This application under Section 14(2) read with Section 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 seeks termination of the...

Original Claim Can Be Amended At Argument Stage In Arbitration Proceedings, Provisions Of CPC Do Not Apply Strictly: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul) has held that an amendment to the original claim may be permitted during arbitral proceedings, even at the stage of final arguments, particularly when costs have been imposed on the party seeking the amendment and accepted by the opposite party—provided the amendment does not materially alter the nature of the original claim or cause prejudice. It further held that while Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) provisions may be...

Court Is Not Appropriate Forum To Seek Interim Relief During Arbitration Proceedings: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that the appropriate forum for seeking interim relief after the constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal is the Tribunal itself under Section 17 of the Arbitration Act. Recourse to the court under Section 9 is permitted during the arbitration proceedings only if the remedy under Section 17 is found to be inefficacious. Brief Facts: This application has been filed under Section 9(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,...

Interim Measures U/S 9 Of Arbitration Can't Be Sought By MSME During Conciliation Proceedings: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act can be sought by the MSME only after mandatory conciliation before the MSME Council fails and the dispute proceeds to arbitration—either conducted by the Council or referred to an arbitral institution. Only then do the provisions of the Arbitration Act apply. Consequently, seeking relief under the Arbitration Act during conciliation is clearly prohibited under...

Execution Of Discharge Voucher Not A Bar To Claim Higher Compensation If Provided For By IRDA Circular: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Aniruddha Roy has held that once the liability or quantum of a claim under an insurance policy is established, the Insurance Company must not withhold the claim amount and must comply with Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA) Circular which entitles the Insured to claim a higher amount. It further held that the Circular clearly provided that if an insured is dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, they are entitled to...

'Non-Consideration Of SC Judgment Amounts To Patent Illegality': Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Award On Grounds Of Unilateral Appointment

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that non-consideration of a judgment of the Supreme Court amounts to patent illegality, which is a valid ground for setting aside an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) particularly when the award is passed by an arbitrator unilaterally appointed by one party. Brief Facts: This application has been filed under section 34 of the Arbitration Act seeking to set...

Excise Duty Under Sugar Cess Act Can Be Claimed As CENVAT Credit: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court stated that excise duty under sugar tax act can be claimed as CENVAT credit. The Bench consists of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) was addressing the issue of whether payment of duty under Sugar Cess Act, 1982 can be claimed as Cenvat Credit when the Cenvat Credit Rules does not provide payment of cess under the Sugar Cess Act, 1982 as not being eligible under Rule 3 of the said Rules. In this case, the adjudicating...

Calcutta High Court Upholds Order Dismissing Plea Challenging Shift Of NCLT Premises To New Town

The Calcutta High Court has upheld a single bench order declining a plea challenging the move to shift the NCLT Kolkata premises located near the High Court, to a new building in the city's New Town area, as proposed by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs.A division bench of Justices Rajarshi Bharadwaj and Apurba Sinha Ray held: "The question, however, is not whether the shift in location is beneficial or detrimental per se, but whether this Court can, in the exercise of its writ jurisdiction,...

When Assessee-Company Can Prove Genuineness Of Transaction, Delhi HC's 'NR Portfolio' Judgment Not Applicable: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court has made it clear that the Delhi High Court decisions in NR Portfolio and Navodaya Castles will hold no value where an assessee-company establishes the identity of its shares subscribers, creditworthiness of the share subscribers and genuineness of the transactions.In CIT v. NR Portfolio Private Limited (2014) and in CITA v. Navodaya Castles Private Limited (2014), the Delhi High Court had held that mere production of incorporation details, PAN Nos. or the fact that third...

Writ Against Third Party Is Maintainable Despite Arbitration Clause When There Are No Disputes Between Contracting Parties: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) has held that when there are no disputes or differences between the parties to an agreement containing an arbitration clause, a writ petition may be entertained against a third party for arbitrary deduction of demurrage amounts. The existence of an arbitration clause between the contracting parties cannot, by itself, be a ground to refuse the maintainability of such a writ petition. ...

Calcutta High Court Upholds Quashing Of ₹7.29 Crore Penalty Imposed On Dissolved HUF

The Calcutta High Court has upheld the quashing of penalty proceedings initiated against a dissolved Hindu Joint Family.A division bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) upheld the ITAT order which had relied on a Supreme Court ruling to declare the penalty action void-ab-initio.The Top Court had in CIT vs. Maruti Suzuki India Limited held that notice and/or consequent order issued in the name of a non-existent person renders the entire proceedings and all...

Evaluation Of Alternative Propositions By Arbitrator For Interim Award Does Not Constitute Inherent Contradiction Or Perversity: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Uday Kumar has held that considering alternative propositions by the Arbitrator and proceeding on the premise that the award holder would be entitled to an interim award under either scenario does not amount to an inherent contradiction. Evaluating alternatives is a legitimate judicial exercise and does not tantamount to perversity. Brief Facts: The dispute arises from an agreement dated December 26, 2004,...