Application Of Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Considered By Court U/S 11 Arbitration & Conciliation Act: Delhi HC [Read Order]
6 years, 4 months ago

Application Of Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Considered By Court U/S 11 Arbitration & Conciliation Act: Delhi HC [Read Order]

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court recently held that courts cannot consider the question of viability of a claim as under Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, while hearing a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.Justice Navin Chawla ruled, “The question whether the claim of the petitioner would be barred by the principles of res judicata or estoppel or by. The Delhi High Court recently held that courts cannot consider the question of viability of a claim as under Order 2 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, while hearing a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Justice Navin Chawla ruled, “The question whether the claim of the petitioner would be barred by the principles of res judicata or estoppel or by Order II Rule 2 of the CPC are not matters to be considered by this Court while exercising its jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Act.” Order 2 Rule 2 CPC states that where a plaintiff omits to sue in respect of, or intentionally relinquishes, any portion of his claim, he shall not afterwards sue in respect of the portion so omitted or relinquished. The court was hearing a petition filed under Section 11, seeking appointment of a nominee Arbitrator on behalf of the respondent, Rail Land Development Authority, for constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal for adjudication of disputes between RLDA and the petitioner, Parsvnath Developers Ltd. RLDA had refused to appoint a nominee Arbitrator, asserting that the arbitral proceedings between them stood concluded during earlier arbitration proceedings in November last year.

Delhi Arbitration Court Res Judicata Order Cpc Rule Claim Res Petitioner Section 11 Arbitral Order 2 Rule 2 Order 2 Rule Rlda  conciliation  delhi  cpc  rule  read  arbitration  11  res  court  arbitral  rlda  order  claim  petitioner  hc  considered

History of this topic

Arbitral Tribunal Is Sole Judge Of Evidence, Court Not Required To Re-Evaluate Evidence U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
6 days, 5 hours ago

Arbitral Tribunal Is Sole Judge Of Evidence, Court Not Required To Re-Evaluate Evidence U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tejas Karia held that the arbitrator is the ultimate master of the quantity and quality of evidence to be relied upon when he delivers his arbitral award. Also, the Court held that it is not required to reappreciate or reevaluate the evidence and reagitate the disputes under Section 34 …

Application U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Not Maintainable If Not Filed With Copy Of Arbitral Award: Delhi High Court
Trending News
6 days, 7 hours ago

Application U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Not Maintainable If Not Filed With Copy Of Arbitral Award: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan has held that an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is non-maintainable if it is not accompanied by a copy of the impugned award. The Single Judge after examining the material on record held that the original petition filed under Section …

Order Passed U/S 23(3) Of Arbitration Act Is Procedural & Not An Interim Award, Cannot Be Challenged U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
6 days, 9 hours ago

Order Passed U/S 23(3) Of Arbitration Act Is Procedural & Not An Interim Award, Cannot Be Challenged U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that an order dismissing an application under Section 23 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act is only a procedural order and does not qualify as an 'interim award' amenable to challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act Brief Facts of the case: The petitioner issued a …

Withdrawal Of MSMED Council Application Does Not Preclude Arbitration U/S 11, Even Without Council's Response: Delhi High Court
1 week ago

Withdrawal Of MSMED Council Application Does Not Preclude Arbitration U/S 11, Even Without Council's Response: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad held that withdrawal of an application before the MSMED Council does not bar a party from seeking the appointment of an arbitrator under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, even in the absence of any corresponding response from the MSMED Council. Observations by the High Court: The High …

Veracity Of Allegations Against Settlement Agreement Cannot Be Looked Into By Court In Application U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
1 week, 4 days ago

Veracity Of Allegations Against Settlement Agreement Cannot Be Looked Into By Court In Application U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri has reiterated that the scope of inquiry under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is limited to examining the prima facie existence of the arbitration agreement. It was further observed that if either party contests a prior settlement agreement, then such allegations cannot be looked into by …

Anti-Arbitration Suit Giving Short-Shrift To Sec 16 A&C Act Is Hit By Order 7 Rule 11(d) Of CPC: Telangana High Court Reiterates
1 week, 5 days ago

Anti-Arbitration Suit Giving Short-Shrift To Sec 16 A&C Act Is Hit By Order 7 Rule 11(d) Of CPC: Telangana High Court Reiterates

Live Law  

The Telangana High Court has reiterated and clarified that suits initiated before Civil Courts to curb arbitration proceedings ignore section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996, and deserve to be rejected under Order 7, Rule 11 as being barred by statute. The appellant herein filed an injunction suit before the trial court seeking to stop the Arbitration proceeding initiated …

Named Arbitrator Cannot Be Replaced Unless There Is Evidence Of Partiality Or Bias Against Them: Andhra Pradesh HC
1 month ago

Named Arbitrator Cannot Be Replaced Unless There Is Evidence Of Partiality Or Bias Against Them: Andhra Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Andhra Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur has held that the request for seeking appointment of an independent arbitrator other than the named arbitrator cannot be entertained if there is no evidence to show that the named arbitrator would act in a partial or biased manner. ' The Supreme Court in Indian Oil Corporation Limited and …

Award Cannot Be Set Aside When No Objections Were Raised Before Arbitrator Or Court U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
1 month, 1 week ago

Award Cannot Be Set Aside When No Objections Were Raised Before Arbitrator Or Court U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul held that the award cannot be set aside solely on the ground that the appointment of the Arbitrator was illegal in view of section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act when no such objections were raised before the Arbitrator or the court under section 34 of …

Construction Of Terms Of Contract Must Be Primarily Decided By Arbitrator, Not Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Construction Of Terms Of Contract Must Be Primarily Decided By Arbitrator, Not Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has held that Construction of the terms of the contract is primarily for the arbitrator to decide, unless it is found that such a construction is not at all possible. It is the case of the petitioner that the Supreme Court in 'ONGC v. Afcons Gunanusa JV' held that unilateral …

Notice To Appoint Another Arbitrator To Continue Arbitration Proceedings Satisfies Mandate Of S.21Of A&C Act: Kerala High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Notice To Appoint Another Arbitrator To Continue Arbitration Proceedings Satisfies Mandate Of S.21Of A&C Act: Kerala High Court

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court bench of Justice Syam Kumar V.M., while hearing a Section 11 petition, has held that a notice to revive a stalled arbitration proceedings by appointing another arbitrator satisfies the mandate of Section 21 of the A&C Act. The court further observed that the dispute between parties arose in 2018, which is evident from the filing of …

Double Payment For Same Claim Violates Public Policy U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Karnataka High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Double Payment For Same Claim Violates Public Policy U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Karnataka High Court

Live Law  

The Karnataka High Court Bench of Chief Justice N. V. Anjaria and Justice K. V. Aravind held that the issue of double payment for the same claim would undoubtedly be in direct conflict with the Public Policy of India and would violate the Fundamental Policy of Indian Law, as well as the basic principles of morality and justice. Additionally, the …

When Counter-Claim Is Related To Primary Dispute, It Can Be Filed Before Tribunal U/S 23 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

When Counter-Claim Is Related To Primary Dispute, It Can Be Filed Before Tribunal U/S 23 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manoj Jain has held that while any counter-claim may relate to a different cause of action, it can still stem from a primary dispute between the parties. For all purposes, the court observed that the counter-claim in this case was, directly or indirectly, related to the primary dispute between the parties and the …

Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act Not Maintainable Against Order Under O.VII R.10 CPC: Punjab And Haryana High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act Not Maintainable Against Order Under O.VII R.10 CPC: Punjab And Haryana High Court

Live Law  

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench comprising of Justice Arun Palli and Justice Vikram Aggarwal has held that an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Act read with Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is not maintainable against an order passed under Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC directing the return …

Issue Related To Existence Of Arbitration Agreement Cannot Be Decided Ex-Parte, Without Hearing Respondent: Delhi High Court
2 months ago

Issue Related To Existence Of Arbitration Agreement Cannot Be Decided Ex-Parte, Without Hearing Respondent: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

A Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur held that the District Judge should not have decided the issue related to the existence of an arbitration agreement ex-parte, without calling upon the respondent to give its stand on the same. The District Judge dismissed the petition and held that the arbitration agreement contained in the …

Delhi HC Rejects Income Tax Director's Appeal U/S 19 Contempt Of Courts Act, Says Appeal Maintainable Only If Order Imposes Punishment
2 months ago

Delhi HC Rejects Income Tax Director's Appeal U/S 19 Contempt Of Courts Act, Says Appeal Maintainable Only If Order Imposes Punishment

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has dismissed the appeal preferred by a Director of Income Tax under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. A division bench of Justices Chandra Dhari Singh and Manoj Jain observed that in the absence of the contempt court recording a finding of guilt or imposing a punishment, the appeal preferred under Section 19 …

Section 13 Of Commercial Courts Act Doesn't Provide Any Independent Right To Appeal In Arbitration Matters: Delhi High Court Reiterates
2 months ago

Section 13 Of Commercial Courts Act Doesn't Provide Any Independent Right To Appeal In Arbitration Matters: Delhi High Court Reiterates

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur has held that an order which neither sets aside nor refuses to set aside the arbitral award, does not fall under the ambit of Section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act and is not appealable. Observations The court held that the appeal would not be maintainable …

Order II Rule 2 CPC Doesn't Mean Different Causes Of Action From Same Transaction Must Be Included In Single Suit : Supreme Court
2 months, 1 week ago

Order II Rule 2 CPC Doesn't Mean Different Causes Of Action From Same Transaction Must Be Included In Single Suit : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court noted that while Order II Rule 2 of the CPC mandates including the entire claim arising from the same cause of action in one suit, it should not be misconstrued to require combining all different causes of action stemming from the same transaction into a single suit. “The mandate of Order II Rule 2 is the inclusion …

Arbitral Award Cannot Be Challenged In Writ Petition, Party Must Use Remedy U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
2 months, 1 week ago

Arbitral Award Cannot Be Challenged In Writ Petition, Party Must Use Remedy U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that it cannot entertain a writ petition challenging an arbitral award, and the petitioner should challenge the award by taking recourse to appropriate remedies under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts: The present petition challenged an arbitral award passed pursuant to reference to arbitration under Section 18 …

Order II Rule 2 CPC Bar Won't Apply When Reliefs In Second Suit Are Based On A Cause Of Action Different From First Suit : Supreme Court
2 months, 1 week ago

Order II Rule 2 CPC Bar Won't Apply When Reliefs In Second Suit Are Based On A Cause Of Action Different From First Suit : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court today ruled that a subsequent suit filed on a different cause of action would not be subject to the bar under Order II Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Affirming the High Court's decision, the judgment authored by Justice Pardiwala observed that though filing a subsequent suit, after the institution of the first suit, …

Delhi High Court Reiterates Limited Scope Of Section 34 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act
2 months, 1 week ago

Delhi High Court Reiterates Limited Scope Of Section 34 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi pronounced a judgement in the matter of “Centre for Research Planning and Action v. National Medicinal Plants Board Ministry of AYUSH Government of India” FAO 161/2022 dated 8th January, 2025 re-iterating the limited scope of Section 34 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Respondent refused to entertain any claim when invoices were raised after March …

Commissioner Cannot Use Its Power U/S 107(2) CGST Act To Review Order Passed By Appellate Authority: Delhi High Court
2 months, 2 weeks ago

Commissioner Cannot Use Its Power U/S 107(2) CGST Act To Review Order Passed By Appellate Authority: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has made it clear that a Commissioner under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act 2017 cannot, in purported exercise of its powers under Section 107, sit in appeal over an order passed by the Appellate Authority. A division bench of Justices Yashwant Varma and Dharmesh Sharma ruled, “The Commissioner, while seeking to review an order …

Termination Of Mandate Of Arbitral Tribunal Results In Waste Of Time, Resources And Money, Court Allowed Petition U/S 29A (4) And (5) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
3 months ago

Termination Of Mandate Of Arbitral Tribunal Results In Waste Of Time, Resources And Money, Court Allowed Petition U/S 29A (4) And (5) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that the parties and the Arbitral Tribunal have invested a lot of time, effort and energy in the arbitral proceedings. Brief Facts: The present petition has been filed under Section 29A and of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with section 7 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 …

Order 23 Rule 2 CPC| Limitation For Suit Instituted Afresh Applies As If Earlier Suit Was Never Filed: Jharkhand High Court
3 months ago

Order 23 Rule 2 CPC| Limitation For Suit Instituted Afresh Applies As If Earlier Suit Was Never Filed: Jharkhand High Court

Live Law  

The Jharkhand High Court has under Order 23 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, the limitation period for a fresh suit instituted with court permission applies as if the original suit had never been filed. Order 23 CPC pertains to withdrawal and adjustment of suits wherein Rule 2 states that in any fresh suit instituted on permission granted under …

Non-Admission Of Claim By Resolution Professional Cannot Be Challenged First Time In Appeal Before Appellate Tribunal: NCLAT
3 months ago

Non-Admission Of Claim By Resolution Professional Cannot Be Challenged First Time In Appeal Before Appellate Tribunal: NCLAT

Live Law  

The NCLAT New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan and Mr. Arun Baroka has held that non admission of claim in the Resolution Plan by the Resolution Plan if not challenged before the Adjudicating Authority cannot be challenged in the appeal before the NCLAT. The same Resolution Plan of Respondent Nos.2 and 3 approved by the Adjudicating Authority on 28.11.2019 …

Delhi High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Litigant For Filing Contempt Plea Against CCI To Stall Authority's Ongoing Investigation Against It
3 months ago

Delhi High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Litigant For Filing Contempt Plea Against CCI To Stall Authority's Ongoing Investigation Against It

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has imposed a cost of Rs. In reality, while the petitioner ostensibly seeks contempt proceedings, it is attempting to secure a judicial review of the investigation methodology through the back door, which cannot be entertained.” Background: The petitioner-company, Forech India Pvt Ltd, was investigated by the CCI regarding alleged existence of a bid-rigging cartel in the …

If Remedy For Cause Of Action Falls Within Scope Of Arbitration Agreement, Counter Party Cannot Be Compelled To Defend It In A Suit: Delhi HC
3 months ago

If Remedy For Cause Of Action Falls Within Scope Of Arbitration Agreement, Counter Party Cannot Be Compelled To Defend It In A Suit: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela held that the scope of examination in an application under Section 8 of the Act is limited to prima facie examining the validity and existence of the arbitration agreement. Once it is accepted that a valid arbitration agreement exists between the parties, the court …

Findings Of Arbitrator U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Scrutinised As If Court Is Sitting In Appeal: Chhattisgarh High Court
3 months, 1 week ago

Findings Of Arbitrator U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Scrutinised As If Court Is Sitting In Appeal: Chhattisgarh High Court

Live Law  

The Chhattisgarh High Court bench of Justices Smt. Rajani Dubey and Shri Bibhu Datta Guru has held that findings of the Arbitrator cannot be scrutinised under section 34 of the Arbitration Act as if the court is sitting in appeal. The appellant submitted that the Commercial Court ought not to have interfered with the findings of the fact with respect …

Error In Order Passed By Court In Arbitration Proceeding Can Be Corrected Under Sections 152, 153 Of CPC: Delhi High Court
3 months, 1 week ago

Error In Order Passed By Court In Arbitration Proceeding Can Be Corrected Under Sections 152, 153 Of CPC: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh has held that any error in an order passed by the court in the Arbitration Proceedings can be corrected under sections 152 and 153 of the CPC provided prejudice is not caused to the other party. It was argued by the respondent that sections 152 and 153 of the Civil …

Order Passed U/S 11 Cannot Be Recalled If Valid Arbitration Agreement Exists To Justify Reference Of Parties To Arbitration: Calcutta HC
3 months, 2 weeks ago

Order Passed U/S 11 Cannot Be Recalled If Valid Arbitration Agreement Exists To Justify Reference Of Parties To Arbitration: Calcutta HC

Live Law  

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya has held that an order passed under section 11 of the Arbitration Act on the basis of an arbitration clause cannot be recalled merely on the ground that reply given to a notice under section 21 was suppressed. Brief Facts The present application has been filed seeking recall of an order …

[Arbitration Act] S.2(1)(f) Is Non-Derogable, Applicability Cannot Be Excluded Even By Mutual Consent Of Parties: Delhi High Court
3 months, 2 weeks ago

[Arbitration Act] S.2(1)(f) Is Non-Derogable, Applicability Cannot Be Excluded Even By Mutual Consent Of Parties: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna has held that section 2 of the Arbitration Act which defined the International Commercial Arbitration is a non derogable provision and its applicability cannot be excluded even by mutual consent of the parties. However, certain Sections of the Act, like S.2 which is the definition section, form the basic structure …

Ineligibility Of Arbitrator Cannot Be Challenged First Time Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court
3 months, 2 weeks ago

Ineligibility Of Arbitrator Cannot Be Challenged First Time Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court

Live Law  

The Madras High Court bench of of Chief justice Mr. K.R.Shriram and Justice Senthil Kumar Ramamoorthy has held that the ineligibility of the Arbitrator cannot be challenged for the first time under section 34 of the Arbitration Act when there were enough opportunities to challenge the same in the earlier proceedings. Later when the award was against the respondents, they …

Delhi HC Allows Invocation Of Arbitration Clause After 10 Yrs, Says That Scope Of S.11(6) Plea Is Limited To Ascertaining Existence Of Agreement
Trending News
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Delhi HC Allows Invocation Of Arbitration Clause After 10 Yrs, Says That Scope Of S.11(6) Plea Is Limited To Ascertaining Existence Of Agreement

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that the scope of the present proceedings is confined to ascertaining the existence of the arbitration agreement. Observation of the court: The court held that the scope of the present proceedings is confined to ascertaining the existence of the arbitration agreement. Then, the court held that since the existence …

Court Which Appointed Arbitrator Has Jurisdiction To Substitute Arbitrator Or Extend Time U/S 29 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
Trending News
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Court Which Appointed Arbitrator Has Jurisdiction To Substitute Arbitrator Or Extend Time U/S 29 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad held that the term "Court" under Section 29A must mean only to be the Court which has appointed the arbitrator and therefore the Court to extend the time or substitute the arbitrator would only be the Court which has appointed the arbitrator and no other Court. Observation of the court: The …

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up [25th November To 1st December, 2024]
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up [25th November To 1st December, 2024]

Live Law  

Supreme Court S.29A Arbitration | 'Sufficient Cause' To Extend Time For Award Should Be Interpreted To Facilitate Effective Dispute Resolution : Supreme Court Case Title: M/S AJAY PROTECH PVT. 34078 of 2023 The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Arif S. Doctor has held that Section 9 of the A&C Act is not the correct mechanism to obtain relief against …

Special Treatment Cannot Be Given To Govt For Delay In Filing Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Special Treatment Cannot Be Given To Govt For Delay In Filing Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Ms. Justice Rekha Palli and Mr. Justice Saurabh Banerjee has affirmed that just because the appellant is government that doesn't mean that a special treatment will be given while condoning the delay in filing the appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration Act. That In M/s Jaitely Construction Co. v. Union of India the …

Arbitrators Cannot Pass Binding And Enforceable Orders Unilaterally Determining Their Fees: Delhi High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitrators Cannot Pass Binding And Enforceable Orders Unilaterally Determining Their Fees: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has affirmed that Arbitrators do not have the power to unilaterally issue binding and enforceable orders determining their own fees. It was further submitted that in ONGC v. Afcons Gunanusa JV 2022 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that a party who is not agreeable to a unilateral revision of …

Delhi High Court Stays Arbitral Proceedings Where Petitioner's Defence Was Struck-Off Due To Non-Payment Of Arbitral Fees
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Delhi High Court Stays Arbitral Proceedings Where Petitioner's Defence Was Struck-Off Due To Non-Payment Of Arbitral Fees

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula has held that the striking off of the defence of the Petitioner for non-payment of arbitral fees is a drastic measure that exceeds the jurisdiction of the Arbitrator. The court noted that “Section 38 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act stipulates that parties shall deposit equal shares of the arbitral fees. …

Executing Court Can Direct Award-Debtor To Deposit Decretal Amount In Court Until Petition U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Is Disposed Of: P&H High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Executing Court Can Direct Award-Debtor To Deposit Decretal Amount In Court Until Petition U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Is Disposed Of: P&H High Court

Live Law  

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench of Justice Suvir Sehgal has held that executing court under section 36 of the Arbitration Act can direct the award debtor to deposit the decretal amount in the court registry till the disposal of the petition under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts Instant revision has been filed under Article 227 …

S.12(5) Of Arbitration Act Would Be Applicable To Arbitral Proceedings Which Commenced Before 2015 Amendment Act: P&H High Court
4 months ago

S.12(5) Of Arbitration Act Would Be Applicable To Arbitral Proceedings Which Commenced Before 2015 Amendment Act: P&H High Court

Live Law  

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench of Justice Suvir Sehgal has held that the provision of Section 12 of the Arbitration Act would applicable to arbitral proceedings which were initiated prior to 2015 Amendment came into force and continued thereafter. In the meantime, the Arbitration Act was amended and as Section 12 was inserted on 23.10.2015, the petitioner submitted …

Whether Claim Is Barred By Res Judicata Cannot Be Decided By Court At S.11 Stage Of Arbitration Act: P&H High Court
4 months ago

Whether Claim Is Barred By Res Judicata Cannot Be Decided By Court At S.11 Stage Of Arbitration Act: P&H High Court

Live Law  

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench of Justice Survir Sehgal affirmed that the question whether a claim is barred by res judicata, does not arise for consideration in a proceedings under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act. That the petitioner had two remedies and having chosen to avail the remedy under Real Estate Act, 1996, he was debarred from …

Objections On Capacity Of Party To Initiate Arbitration Must Be Addressed Before Tribunal, Not While Appointing Arbitrator: Delhi HC
Trending News
4 months ago

Objections On Capacity Of Party To Initiate Arbitration Must Be Addressed Before Tribunal, Not While Appointing Arbitrator: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that the objections as regards the capacity of the party to initiate arbitration is an aspect which is necessarily required to be gone into the arbitration proceedings, however, the same could not preclude the constitution of an Arbitral Tribunal. The court held that a party may raise appropriate jurisdictional/preliminary …

Pre-Requirement Of Conciliation Before Invoking Arbitration Can't Prevent Filing Of Application U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
4 months ago

Pre-Requirement Of Conciliation Before Invoking Arbitration Can't Prevent Filing Of Application U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that pre requirement of conciliation in an arbitration clause before invoking the arbitration cannot be a bar to file an application under section 11 of the Arbitration Act seeking appointment of an Arbitrator. That disputes have arisen between the parties regarding payment of dues.,the Petitioner herein invoked Clause 17.7 …

High Court As Court Of Record Can Recall Or Review Orders Passed U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Bombay High Court
4 months, 1 week ago

High Court As Court Of Record Can Recall Or Review Orders Passed U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Manish Pitale has held that the moment it becomes clear that the power under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act is being exercised by the “High Court” and not by an authority in the form of the “Chief Justice or any person or institution designated by him”, there can be no confusion about …

De-Jure Ineligibility To Act As Arbitrator U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act Can Be Waived Only By Express Agreement In Writing: Delhi High Court
Trending News
4 months, 1 week ago

De-Jure Ineligibility To Act As Arbitrator U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act Can Be Waived Only By Express Agreement In Writing: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta affirmed that de jure ineligibility to act as an arbitrator can only be waived, after dispute having arisen, by the parties by an express agreement in writing under proviso to section 12 of the Arbitration Act. The court referred to the Delhi High Court judgment in Reliance Infrastructure Limited v. Madhyanchal …

Scope Of Review U/S 37 Is Limited To Ascertaining Compliance With S. 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
4 months, 1 week ago

Scope Of Review U/S 37 Is Limited To Ascertaining Compliance With S. 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Rekha Palli and Saurabh Banerjee affirmed that the Court under section 37 of the Arbitration Act cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award, and must only ascertain that the exercise of power by the Court under Section 34 has not exceeded the scope of the provision Brief Facts The …

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: 4th November To 10th November 2024
4 months, 1 week ago

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: 4th November To 10th November 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Government Entity Can't Be Given Differential Treatment While Staying Operation Of Arbitral Award : Supreme Court Case Title: International Seaport Dredging Pvt Ltd Versus Kamarajar Port Limited, Case Number- Civil Appeal No 12097 of 2024 Recently, the Supreme Court disapproved of a High Court's decision to exempt a government entity from depositing other amounts in addition to the …

Arbitration Monthly Digest: October 2024
4 months, 1 week ago

Arbitration Monthly Digest: October 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Title: R.P. Case Title: LAVA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Vs MINTELLECTUALS LLP Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 1114 The Delhi High Court bench comprising Justice Prateek Jalan has held that in orders passed by the arbitral tribunal under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court is not bound by the principles underlying Order XXXVIII and XXXIX of …

Unconditional Withdrawal Of Arbitrator Appointment Application Bars Second Application On Same Cause Of Action: Supreme Court
4 months, 1 week ago

Unconditional Withdrawal Of Arbitrator Appointment Application Bars Second Application On Same Cause Of Action: Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court observed that when a party seeking appointment of an arbitrator unconditionally withdraws its application, then the subsequent application for an appointment of an arbitrator on the same cause of action would be barred.The bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala ruled that Order 23 Rule 1 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 would be. The …

Delhi High Court Rejects Petitioner's Request to Stay Termination of Lease Agreement
4 months, 3 weeks ago

Delhi High Court Rejects Petitioner's Request to Stay Termination of Lease Agreement

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has allowed a petition seeking stay of the effect and operation of the Termination Notice dated 01.10.2024 issued by the respondent No. 1 to the petitioner. The court held that the role of the court under section 9 of the Arbitration Act is to preserve the subject matter of the Arbitration till the arbitral tribunal decides …

Delhi High Court Rules on Appointment of Arbitral Tribunal: Invalid Procedures Before Improper Arbitral Tribunal Are Non-Est
5 months ago

Delhi High Court Rules on Appointment of Arbitral Tribunal: Invalid Procedures Before Improper Arbitral Tribunal Are Non-Est

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has held that any proceedings before an improperly constituted arbitral tribunal are non-est. This means that any disputes arising from an improperly constituted arbitral tribunal are not subject to arbitration. The court also held that whether a particular claim is precluded from arbitration on account of being an excepted matter should be decided by a duly …

Discover Related