Telangana High Court
Non-Signatory Must Have Live & Proximate Connection To Arbitration Agreement For Being Pulled Into Proceedings U/S 9 Of A&C Act: Telangana HC
The Telangana High Court Division Bench comprising of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice B.R. Madhusudhan Rao has observed that for being pulled into the proceedings u/s 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, a non-signatory must have a live and proximate connection to arbitration agreement. The bench observed that the law has pushed the boundaries to pull in non-signatories to the arbitration agreement where the conduct of such parties reflects their intention to be...
Commercial Courts Act Is Entity-Neutral In Terms Of Limitation; Govt Suffers Same Pitfalls As Private Entity: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court Division Bench, comprising Justices Moushumi Bhattacharya and B.R. Madhusudhan Rao, observed that the Commercial Courts Act 2015 is an entity-neutral statute in terms of the limitation period. The Commercial Courts Act 2015 is in place to ensure the speedy resolution of high-stakes commercial disputes. Factual Matrix: The Telangana State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (“TSIDCL”) had filed a Commercial Original Petition (“COM") u/s 31(1)(a) and...
Sole Arbitrator's Appointment By One Party Due To Other Party's Inaction After Notice Is Not Unilateral: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya has held that an arbitrator appointed by one party in accordance with the agreed terms, after giving due notice, cannot be challenged as a unilateral appointment if the other party was given a full and fair opportunity to nominate its arbitrator but chose not to act. In such a situation, enforcement of a foreign award cannot be refused under Section 48 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Brief Facts: The...
When Party Questions Validity Of Draft Agreement Containing Arbitration Clause, Reference Can't Be Sought Based On It: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court bench of Sri Justice P. Sam Koshy and Sri Justice N. Tukaramji has held that when a party, in its reply to a Section 8 petition under the Arbitration Act, has expressly denied the existence or validity of the agreements containing the arbitration clause by terming them null and void, such agreements cannot subsequently be relied upon by the same party as the basis to seek reference of the disputes to arbitration. Brief Facts: The instant appeal has been filed...
When Mandate Of Arbitrator Is Terminated U/S 15 Of Arbitration Act, New Arbitrator Can't Be Appointed By Court U/S 11(6) Of Act: Telangana HC
The Telangana High Court bench of Justice N.V. Shravan Kumar has held that when the mandate of an arbitrator terminates under Section 15 of the Arbitration Act, a substitute arbitrator must be appointed in accordance with the original procedure agreed upon by the parties. In such cases, the court cannot appoint a new arbitrator under Section 11, as the appropriate course is to appoint a substitute following the mechanism under Section 15(2), not initiate a fresh appointment process. ...
Award-Holder Can't Be Denied Withdrawal Of Amount Deposited Pursuant To Stay Merely Because Award Debtor May Succeed In Appeal: Telangana HC
The Telangana High Court bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya and Justice B.R. Madhusudhan Raohas has held that the award holder can be allowed to withdraw the amount deposited by the award debtor in pursuance of stay on the execution of the award. The award holder cannot be prohibited from withdrawing the amount only on the ground that the award debtor may succeed in the appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Brief Facts: The Civil Revision Petition...
In Interconnected Agreements, Use Of Word 'May' Does Not Defeat Clear Intention To Arbitrate In Main Agreement: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court bench of Justice K. Lakshman has held that in case of interconnected agreements, where the mother agreement clearly and unequivocally refers the disputes to arbitration, mere use of 'may' in the arbitration clause of one of the ancillary agreements will not defeat the intention to arbitrate. Brief Facts: This application has been filed under section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act seeking an appointment of an Arbitrator. The Applicant, a developer, entered...
Whether A Particular Contract Is A Works Contract Under MSME Can't Be Decided Under Writ Jurisdiction: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court bench of Justice K. Lakshman has held that the question of whether a particular contract is a works contract or not is for the MSME Council to decide, and the dispute cannot be decided under writ jurisdiction. Brief Facts: This writ petition challenges the order dated 21.12.2024 in Case No. 1292/MSEFC/2021 passed by Respondent No. 2, seeking a declaration that the order is non-arbitrable and illegal. The petitioner prays for a direction to Respondent No. 2 to...
Mere Passage Of Time Does Not Bar Arbitration If Arbitration Clause Remains Valid & Enforceable: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court bench of Justice K Lakshman has held that mere passage of time does not bar arbitration if the arbitration clause remains valid. The Limitation for the purpose of filing the application under section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act commences from the date when request for initiating arbitration is rejected. Brief Facts: This application has been filed under Section - 11 (5) & (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Arbitration Act'), to appoint a...
When Earlier Appointment Of Arbitrator Is Defective, Court May Appoint New Arbitrator U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court bench of Justice K. Lakshman has held that a substitute arbitrator must generally be appointed in the same mode and manner as the original arbitrator. When the appointment of an earlier arbitrator was done under a defective arbitration clause or an unlawful procedure was followed, in such cases a proper recourse is to seek appointment of a new arbitrator under section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Brief Facts: The present two applications...
Open Terrace/Portico Excluded While Computing Built-Up Area To Determine Eligibility For Deduction U/S 80-IB Of IT Act: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court stated that open terrace/portico excluded while computing build-up area for determining eligibility for deduction under section 80-IB of Income Tax Act. The Bench consists of Justices P. Sam Koshy and Narsing Rao Nandikonda was addressing the issue of whether the terrace / balcony that is in the form of open to sky or portico / porch area without walls could be added while computing the built-up area for the purpose of determining the eligibility for deduction...
Limitation Act Applies To Proceedings Under Interest On Delayed Payments To Small Scale & Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court bench of Justice P. Sam Koshy and Justice N. Tukaramji have held that the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963 are applicable to proceedings initiated under the Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993. The Court clarified that the overriding effect under Section 10 of the 1993 Act applies only to the express provisions of that Act and does not exclude the applicability of the Limitation Act in the absence of any...