Delhi High Court
Applicability Of Arbitration Clause Is To Be Determined By Arbitrator, Cannot Be Decided In S.11 Plea: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that contentions regarding the applicability and relevance of an arbitration agreement are to be dealt with by the arbitrator and cannot be gone into at the stage of section 11 petition. Once the existence of arbitration agreement is not disputed, any dispute related to the applicability of the agreement has to be dealt by the arbitrator. Brief Facts of the case: The petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and...
Inconsequential Errors Cannot Be Grounds To Challenge Judicious & Reasoned Award U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Manoj Kunar Ohri has held that the petitioner cannot take advantage of apparent inconsequential errors and fumbles to challenge the award. Inconsequential errors in the award cannot be a ground to challenge otherwise judicious and reasoned award. Brief Facts of the case: The respondent accepted an offer letter to procure a machine from the petitioner. As per the terms, the petitioner was obligated to deliver the machine within a period of ten...
Dispute Review Board's Recommendations Are Arbitral Awards, Enforceable U/S 36 Of A&C Act: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tejas Karia has held that the recommendations of the Dispute Review Board (DRB) rendered under a contract constitute an arbitral award which is enforceable as a decree under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court further held that the limitation for enforcement begins from the date of the award, not from the date of the judgment declaring it as an 'award'. Brief Facts: The appellant,...
[Income Tax] Delhi HC Larger Bench To Decide On Retrospective Applicability Of Extended Limitation For Reassessment In Cases Involving Foreign Assets
A larger bench of the Delhi High Court will decide whether Section 149(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act 1961, inserted vide a 2012 amendment to provide an extended period of reassessment for cases involving foreign assets, applies retrospectively.Section 149(1)(c) prescribes that reassessment notice in respect of any income in relation to any asset located outside India, which had escaped assessment, is not proscribed for a period of 16 years from the end of the assessment year in which such income...
S.161 CGST Act | Rectification Order Must Be Reasoned, Adverse Order Can Be Passed Only After Hearing Party: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has made it clear that an order in rectification proceedings must be reasoned, passed after affording an opportunity of hearing to the party.A division bench of Justices Prathiba M. Singh and Rajneesh Kumar Gupta made the observation while dealing with a petition against rejection of Petitioner's application seeking rectification of impugned demand orderPetitioner pointed out that in terms of the proviso 3 to Section 161 of the Central/Delhi Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017...
Delhi High Court Protects Personality Rights Of Sadhguru, Passes John Doe Order Restraining Misuse Through AI
The Delhi High Court has passed a john doe order protecting the personality rights of Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev, founder of Isha Foundation, and has restrained various rogue websites and unknown entities from misusing his personality traits through the use of Artificial Intelligence in any platform or medium.Justice Saurabh Banerjee passed a dynamic+ injunction in favour of Sadhguru observing thus:“Therefore, the position of law apparent therefrom, which has since developed with the passage of...
Sadhguru Moves Delhi High Court Against Infringement Of Personality Rights By Rogue Websites, Use Of AI
Jagadish Vasudev popularly known as Sadhguru moved the Delhi High Court on Friday (May 30) in a suit seeking protection against infringement of his personality rights by rogue websites through the use of Artificial Intelligence. The counsel appearing for Sadhguru submitted before Justice Saurabh Banerjee that Sadhguru's name and likeness is being used by rogue websites to sell products. He said that Sadhguru is renowned and revered figure and a house hold name in India, arguing that...
Liquidated Damages Clause Does Not Permit Automatic Recovery Of Full Amount, Actual Loss Must Be Proven: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri has held that the law mandates proof of actual loss despite the presence of an Liquidated Damages (LD) clause and does not allow automatic recovery of the entire LD amount upon breach. Therefore, the Petitioner's unilateral adjustment without adjudication was unlawful. The AT rightly held that such unilateral recovery does not obviate the need for proper adjudication of the LD claim.Brief Facts:The impugned award arose from Contract...
Arbitration Clause Prevails Over Exclusive Jurisdiction Clause, Court At Designated Seat Retains Jurisdiction: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav has held that when an exclusive jurisdiction clause is expressly made "subject to" the arbitration clause, and the arbitration clause designates a different territorial location as the seat of arbitration, the arbitration clause prevails. In case of conflict, the jurisdiction of the court is determined by the seat designated in the arbitration agreement which overrides the exclusive jurisdictional clause mentioned in the...
'Industrial Building' Not Limited To Manufacturing Units, Can Include IT & Software Offices For Purposes Of Property Tax: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that the scope of an 'Industrial Building' cannot be restricted merely to traditional notions of manufacturing involving tangible and physical goods.Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav rather held that an 'Industrial Building' encompasses IT sector businesses where non-material inputs such as data, digital content, or intellectual capital are subjected to systematic transformation or reconstitution into new intellectual property outputs, such as software, algorithms,...
Plea Of Waiving Arbitration Clause Cannot Be Examined By Referral Court U/S Of 8 A&C Act, Falls Within Domain Of Tribunal: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav while allowing an application under Section 8, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“ACA”) has observed that the plea of waiver of arbitration clause is a plea concerning rights in personam and does not render the dispute to be manifestly non-arbitrable. Consequently, the determination of such a plea properly falls within the jurisdictional domain of the Arbitral Tribunal itself. Facts The instant application had...
No Fixed Format For Sending Notice U/S 21 Of A&C Act, Outlining Clear Intention To Adopt Arbitration Is Sufficient: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that there is no prescribed format for a notice invoking arbitration. The legal requirement is that the party invoking arbitration must clearly outline the disputes between the parties and state that if these disputes remain unresolved, arbitration proceedings will be initiated. The intention to resolve the disputes through arbitration must be explicitly stated in the notice. Brief Facts: In the present case, Petitioners...







