Arbitration Appeals Are Bound By Rules Of Limitation: Kerala HC [Read Order]
7 years, 8 months ago

Arbitration Appeals Are Bound By Rules Of Limitation: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Live Law  

A division bench of the High Court of Kerala has ruled that even in the absence of express provisions, arbitration appeals are bound by rules of limitation.An arbitration appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, was filed before the high court. The registry raised objections in numbering the appeal, as the same was preferred without a petition seeking condonation of delay.The division bench presided by Justice V. Chitambaresh and Justice Satish Ninan upheld the objections raised by registry and held that even in absence of express provisions, an arbitral appeal ought to be preferred within the specified period of limitation of 90 days.The Kerala Arbitration and Conciliation Rules 1997, provides that in the absence of express provisions in the rules, the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and Kerala Civil Rules of Practice, 1971, would mutatis mutandis apply to the proceedings under the Act.Taking cue from it, the bench held that since the limitation prescribed for appeal against decree or judgment under the Code before the high court was prescribed as 90 days, the same would be applicable in the case of an arbitral appeal as well.Justice Chitambaresh explained the judicial wisdom of the court on the following lines: “The period of limitation for filing an appeal under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to this court from any decree or order is ninety days from the date of the decree or order under Article 116 of the Limitation Act, 1963. It axiomatically follows that the period of limitation for filing an appeal under Section 37 of the Act against an order refusing to set aside an arbitral award is ninety days.”

Kerala Court Limitation Express Provisions Provisions Arbitration Provisions Arbitration Appeal  hc  kerala  limitation  read  rules  appeals  provisions  arbitration  appeal  court  period  bound  high  order

History of this topic

Appeals U/S 19 Of Contempt Of Court Act Can Only Be Against Order Imposing Punishment, Framing Of Charges Not Appealable: Kerala High Court
3 weeks, 4 days ago

Appeals U/S 19 Of Contempt Of Court Act Can Only Be Against Order Imposing Punishment, Framing Of Charges Not Appealable: Kerala High Court

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court observed that an appeal under Section 19 of the Contempt of Court Act will lie only in cases when the order is connected and incidental to the order of punishment for contempt. “Hence, the scheme of Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, the Rules framed thereunder, and the decisions of the Apex Court, …

Limitation Period For Filing Appeal U/S 61 Of IBC Commences From Date Of Order, Not From Date Of Its Receipt: NCLAT
1 month ago

Limitation Period For Filing Appeal U/S 61 Of IBC Commences From Date Of Order, Not From Date Of Its Receipt: NCLAT

Live Law  

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal New Delhi bench of Justice Ashok Bhushan, Mr. Barun Mitra and Mr. Arun Baroka has held that the limitation period for filing an appeal under section 61 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 shall commence from the date of passing of the order and not from the date when a copy of the …

Plea That Signed Copy Of Award Was Not Received Cannot Be Raised For First Time In Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act: Gujarat High Court
1 month, 1 week ago

Plea That Signed Copy Of Award Was Not Received Cannot Be Raised For First Time In Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act: Gujarat High Court

Live Law  

The Gujarat High Court bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi has held that the plea that limitation period for challenging the award under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 did not start as the signed copy of the award was not received by the party, cannot be raised for the first time in …

Limitation For Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act Is Governed By Article 116 Of Limitation Act, Delay Not To Be Condoned In Mechanical Manner: Bombay HC
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Limitation For Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act Is Governed By Article 116 Of Limitation Act, Delay Not To Be Condoned In Mechanical Manner: Bombay HC

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has held that the delay in filing an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 should not be condoned in a mechanical manner as it would defeat the very objective of the Arbitration Act which is to provide a speedy resolution of disputes. It also held that as …

Appeal In Commercial Dispute Arising From Arbitration Act Must Be Filed Before Commercial Appellate Court, Not HC: Orissa High Court
1 month, 4 weeks ago

Appeal In Commercial Dispute Arising From Arbitration Act Must Be Filed Before Commercial Appellate Court, Not HC: Orissa High Court

Live Law  

The Orissa High Court bench of Justice S.K. Panigrahi has held that a plain reading of Sections 6 and 10 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, leads to the conclusion that the appropriate 'court' to consider a commercial dispute, even if it arises under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, would be the commercial court and an appeal would, therefore, lie …

Notice To Appoint Another Arbitrator To Continue Arbitration Proceedings Satisfies Mandate Of S.21Of A&C Act: Kerala High Court
1 month, 4 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 …

[S.16 Arbitration Act] Jurisdiction Of Tribunal Cannot Be Challenged After Submission Of Defence: Allahabad High Court
2 months ago

[S.16 Arbitration Act] Jurisdiction Of Tribunal Cannot Be Challenged After Submission Of Defence: Allahabad High Court

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court has held that as per Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal cannot be challenged after submission of defence and that the arbitral tribunal is empowered to adjudicate on its own jurisdiction. The bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Dr. Justice Yogendra Kumar Srivastava held “Section 16 of …

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

Violation Of Provisions Of Arbitration Act Or MSMED Act Can Be Adjudicated By Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Orissa High Court
2 months ago

Violation Of Provisions Of Arbitration Act Or MSMED Act Can Be Adjudicated By Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Orissa High Court

Live Law  

An Orissa High Court bench of Justice K.R. Mohapatra has dismissed a writ petition upon holding that the petitioner, without availing the efficacious statutory remedy u/s 34 of the Arbitration Act had approached the Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for which the Court was not inclined to exercise its discretionary power to entertain it. Additionally, the …

Arbitration Act | Courts' Jurisdiction Under Sections 34 and 37 Do Not Extend To Modifying Arbitral Award: Supreme Court Reiterates
2 months, 1 week ago

Arbitration Act | Courts' Jurisdiction Under Sections 34 and 37 Do Not Extend To Modifying Arbitral Award: Supreme Court Reiterates

Live Law  

Recently, the Supreme Court affirmed the principle laid down in National Highways Authority of India vs. M. Hakeem & Another that the jurisdiction of the Courts under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 will not extend to modifying an arbitral award.The bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Manoj Misra was hearing the case dealing with …

'Arbitrator Can Only Decide On Point Which Is Referred To Tribunal, Not Entire Dispute': Kerala High Court
2 months, 1 week ago

'Arbitrator Can Only Decide On Point Which Is Referred To Tribunal, Not Entire Dispute': Kerala High Court

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court Bench of Justice Dr A. K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Easwaran S. held that if the parties choose to refer to a singular point for arbitration, then the arbitral tribunal cannot proceed to decide on all disputes. On the contrary, if the parties agree to arbitrate on the entire disputes, then the arbitral tribunal shall have …

Arbitration Cases Annual Digest 2024
2 months, 4 weeks ago

Arbitration Cases Annual Digest 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Validity Of Section 3G Of National Highways Act Case Title: B.D. High Court Not Having Original Civil Jurisdiction Cannot Extend Time To Pass Arbitral Award As Per S.29A Arbitration Act : Supreme Court Case Title: CHIEF ENGINEER PWD VERSUS M/S BSC & C and C JV Citation : 2024 LiveLaw 425 …

Arbitration Cases Quarterly Digest: October To December 2024
Trending News
2 months, 4 weeks ago

Arbitration Cases Quarterly Digest: October To December 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Title: R.P. Agreement Between Parties Must Be Given Primacy When Deciding Petition U/S 9 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court Case Title: M/S INNOVATIVE FACILITY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD v. M/S AFFORDABLE INFRASTRUCTURE Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 1192 The Delhi High Court Bench of Mr. Justice Jasmeet Singh held that the role of the court under section 9 of …

Reference Application U/S 8 Of Arbitration Act Should Be Filed Within 120 Days From Date Of Service Of Summons: Karnataka High Court
3 months ago

Reference Application U/S 8 Of Arbitration Act Should Be Filed Within 120 Days From Date Of Service Of Summons: Karnataka High Court

Live Law  

The Karnataka High Court Bench of Justice Hemant Chandangoudar has held that a reference application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, should have been filed within a period of 120 days from the date of service of summons to the defendant, which was long passed before 20.03.2019. Thus, where the reference application under Section 8 of …

Arbitration Act: Important Judgments By Supreme Court In 2024
3 months ago

Arbitration Act: Important Judgments By Supreme Court In 2024

Live Law  

As the year 2024 nears its end, LiveLaw brings to you a summary of important Supreme Court judgments of the year rendered in connection with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. High Court Not Having Original Civil Jurisdiction Cannot Extend Time To Pass Arbitral Award As Per S.29A Arbitration Act : Supreme Court Case: Chief Engineer PWD v. M/s BSC …

Arbitration Act: Important Judgments By Supreme Court In 2024
3 months ago

Arbitration Act: Important Judgments By Supreme Court In 2024

Live Law  

As the year 2024 nears its end, LiveLaw brings to you a summary of important Supreme Court judgments of the year rendered in connection with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. High Court Not Having Original Civil Jurisdiction Cannot Extend Time To Pass Arbitral Award As Per S.29A Arbitration Act : Supreme Court Case: Chief Engineer PWD v. M/s BSC …

Sufficiency Of Reasons Over Number Of Days Is Considered While Determining Plea Of Condonation Of Delay U/S 37(1)(2) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC
3 months, 1 week ago

Sufficiency Of Reasons Over Number Of Days Is Considered While Determining Plea Of Condonation Of Delay U/S 37(1)(2) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee held that the appellant failed to demonstrate any plausible reasons for the delay caused in filing the present appeal. The appeal was also accompanied by two applications, the first seeking condonation of 670 days delay in filing the appeal and the second 591 days delay in re-filing …

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 …

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up [ 2nd December To 8th December, 2024]
3 months, 2 weeks ago

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up [ 2nd December To 8th December, 2024]

Live Law  

High Courts Allahabad High Court Case Title: Anoop Maheshwari v. Thomas T. Kurian While entertaining a revision petition related to a tenancy agreement, the Allahabad High Court has held that a clause for arbitration cannot be invoked for any disputes that arise after the contract has come to an end. Bombay High Court Case Title: Bks Galaxy Realtors LLP v. …

Petition U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Entertained After Lapse Of 3 Yrs From Date Of Cause Of Action Arising: J&K High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Petition U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Entertained After Lapse Of 3 Yrs From Date Of Cause Of Action Arising: J&K High Court

Live Law  

The Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court bench of Justice Tashi Rabstan has held that the petition under section 11 of the Arbitration Act cannot be entertained after lapse of 3 years from the date of cause of action having arisen. In the present case, the cause of action to file the petition under Section 11 of the Act, …

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

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 …

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

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
4 months 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 …

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, 1 week 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 …

When There Is No Appeal Provision Provided By Law, Judgment Made In Appeal Is Non-Est: Kerala High Court
4 months, 2 weeks ago

When There Is No Appeal Provision Provided By Law, Judgment Made In Appeal Is Non-Est: Kerala High Court

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court stated that when there is no appeal provision given in law, then the judgment made in appeal was non-est in law and could be ignored. The Court was considering the challenge against an order issued by the Sessions Judge, dismissing Magistrate's order when there was no provision provided for appeal. When such a remedy is not …

Scope Of Review U/S 37 Is Limited To Ascertaining Compliance With S. 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
4 months, 2 weeks 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, 2 weeks 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, 2 weeks 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 …

HC holds that civil courts have jurisdiction to order execution of decree on Waqf disputes
4 months, 3 weeks ago

HC holds that civil courts have jurisdiction to order execution of decree on Waqf disputes

The Hindu  

The Kerala High Court has held that a civil court has the jurisdiction to execute a decree passed by a civil court on a Waqf dispute prior to the formation of the Waqf tribunal or to execute a decree passed by the Waqf tribunal itself. The petitioners had challenged a civil court’s dismissal of a petition filed by them seeking …

Arbitration Cases Monthly Digest: September 2024
5 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Cases Monthly Digest: September 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Title: COX & KINGS LTD. Delhi High Court Case Title: Apex Buildsys Ltd. Vs Vadera Interiors And Exteriors and connected matter Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 956 The Delhi High Court bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar has held that objections related to the legality of an arbitrator's appointment cannot be raised in a petition seeking an extension of …

Invocation Of Article 227 Against Final Orders/ Judgments Passed By Sessions Court In Appeal Is 'Almost Barred': Kerala High Court
6 months, 3 weeks ago

Invocation Of Article 227 Against Final Orders/ Judgments Passed By Sessions Court In Appeal Is 'Almost Barred': Kerala High Court

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court has held that there is almost an an absolute bar on challenging the final order or judgment passed by a Sessions Court in appeal, under Article 227 of the Constitution. Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas referred to multiple Supreme Court decisions which held that a person cannot approach the High Court under Article 227 when there is …

Arbitration | Referral Courts Must Not Conduct Intricate Enquiry On Whether Claims Are Time-Barred : Supreme Court Clarifies 'Arif Azim' Judgment
8 months, 1 week ago

Arbitration | Referral Courts Must Not Conduct Intricate Enquiry On Whether Claims Are Time-Barred : Supreme Court Clarifies 'Arif Azim' Judgment

Live Law  

The Supreme Court held that while deciding a Section 11 petition for an appointment of an arbitrator, the referral courts must not conduct an intricate evidentiary enquiry into the question of whether the claims raised by the applicant are time-barred and should leave that question for determination by the arbitrator. The bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala …

Chief Justice Or Their Designate Cannot Adjudicate Merits Of Dispute Under Section 11 Of Arbitration Act: Calcutta High Court
8 months, 3 weeks ago

Chief Justice Or Their Designate Cannot Adjudicate Merits Of Dispute Under Section 11 Of Arbitration Act: Calcutta High Court

Live Law  

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya has held that it is completely beyond the domain of the Chief Justice and/or his designate, sitting in jurisdiction under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, to adjudicate even prima facie on the merits of an arguable issue involved in the matter, which would fall categorically within the …

Arbitration Weekly Roundup: June 24 - June 30, 2024
8 months, 4 weeks ago

Arbitration Weekly Roundup: June 24 - June 30, 2024

Live Law  

Delhi High Court Objections Regarding Time-Barred Claims Under Section 11 Petition Should Be Left For Arbitral Tribunal: Delhi High Court Case Title: Capri Global Capital Limited Vs Ms Kiran Case Number: ARB.P. Orrisa High Court No Reappreciation Of Evidence Permitted Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act, Arbitrator's Views Must Be Respected: Orissa High Court Case Title: Principal Secretary to the …

Arbitration Weekly Roundup: June 10 - June 16, 2024
9 months, 1 week ago

Arbitration Weekly Roundup: June 10 - June 16, 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court High Court Not Having Original Civil Jurisdiction Cannot Extend Time To Pass Arbitral Award As Per S.29A Arbitration Act : Supreme Court Case Title: CHIEF ENGINEER PWD VERSUS M/S BSC & C and C JV Citation : 2024 LiveLaw 425 The Supreme Court held that a High Court which does not have original civil jurisdiction does not have …

[Arbitration Act] General Explanation Of Intra-departmental Analysis And Discussions Doesn't Constitute Credible Explanation For Delay In Filing Appeal: Delhi High Court
9 months, 3 weeks ago

[Arbitration Act] General Explanation Of Intra-departmental Analysis And Discussions Doesn't Constitute Credible Explanation For Delay In Filing Appeal: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju held that a general explanation of intra-departmental analysis and discussions doesn't constitute as valid and credible explanation for condonation of delay in filing an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Brief Facts: The Appellant approached the Delhi High Court and filed …

Court Fully Empowered To Extend Mandate Even After Expiry Of Arbitral Tribunal's Mandate Under Section 29A(4): Delhi High Court
9 months, 4 weeks ago

Court Fully Empowered To Extend Mandate Even After Expiry Of Arbitral Tribunal's Mandate Under Section 29A(4): Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh held the court is fully empowered to extend the mandate, even after the expiry of the mandate of the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Feeling aggrieved, the Petitioner approached the Delhi High Court and filed a petition under Sections 29A & of the …

Special Appeal/ Letters Patent Appeal Against Order U/S.11 Of Arbitration Act Not Maintainable: Allahabad High Court
10 months, 1 week ago

Special Appeal/ Letters Patent Appeal Against Order U/S.11 Of Arbitration Act Not Maintainable: Allahabad High Court

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court has held that by virtue of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, special appeal and letters patent appeal against orders passed under Section 11, and of the Act is not maintainable. Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 bars any appeal, including letters patent appeals against an order passed under Section …

Arbitral Tribunal Cant Go Outside Reference Order, Cannot Widen Its Jurisdiction By Dealing With Disputes Not Referred To It: Punjab And Haryana High Court
10 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitral Tribunal Cant Go Outside Reference Order, Cannot Widen Its Jurisdiction By Dealing With Disputes Not Referred To It: Punjab And Haryana High Court

Live Law  

The Punjab and Haryana High Court single bench of Justice Suvir Sehgal held that an Arbitral Tribunal cannot go outside the reference order by the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission under Section 86 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and cannot widen its jurisdiction by dealing with disputes not referred to it. Observations by the High Court: The High Court noted …

Arbitration Weekly Round Up: 22nd April to 28th April 2024
10 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Weekly Round Up: 22nd April to 28th April 2024

Live Law  

Allahabad High Court Court Under Section 19 Of MSMED Act, 2006 Empowered To Allow Predeposit In Installments: Allahabad High Court Case Title: M/S Docket Care Systems vs M/S Hariwill Electronics India Pvt. Delhi High Court Debt Acknowledged In Letters, Delhi High Court Grants Benefit Of Section 18 To Hold Invocation Of Arbitration Within Limitation Case Title: Paisalo Digital Limited v. …

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: 15th April to 21st April 2024
11 months ago

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: 15th April to 21st April 2024

Live Law  

High Courts Bombay High Court Can A Section 29A Application Be Filed In The Commercial Court Or Only In The High Court? An Award Issued By Unilaterally Appointed Arbitrator Can Be Contested For Invalidity Of Appointment, Even By The Appointing Party: Delhi High Court Case Title: Telecommunication Consultants India Ltd v. Shivaa Trading Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 471 The High Court …

Appointment Of Arbitrator In Violation Of S. 12(5) Of A&C Act Is Void, Waiver Of This Provision Requires Explicit Written Agreement: Kerala High Court
11 months, 1 week ago

Appointment Of Arbitrator In Violation Of S. 12(5) Of A&C Act Is Void, Waiver Of This Provision Requires Explicit Written Agreement: Kerala High Court

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court single bench of Justice G. Girish held that the exemption provided for under the proviso of Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act applies only in cases where there is a waiver explicitly agreed upon in writing by the parties involved. Feeling aggrieved, the Petitioner approached the Kerala High Court under Section 14 read with …

Arbitration Weekly Round-up: 1st April to 7th April 2024
11 months, 2 weeks ago

Arbitration Weekly Round-up: 1st April to 7th April 2024

Live Law  

High Courts Allahabad High Court Allahabad High Court Directs Inquiry Against Officers Who Failed To File Arbitration Appeals Within Prescribed Limitation Case Title: Executive Engineer Drainage Division v. Ms Ayush Construction And Another The Allahabad High Court has directed Principal Secretary/Additional Chief Secretary, Irrigation, Uttar Pradesh to conduct an inquiry against officers who were responsible for filing appeals under Section …

Allahabad High Court Directs Inquiry Against Officers Who Failed To File Arbitration Appeals Within Prescribed Limitation
11 months, 4 weeks ago

Allahabad High Court Directs Inquiry Against Officers Who Failed To File Arbitration Appeals Within Prescribed Limitation

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court has directed Principal Secretary/Additional Chief Secretary, Irrigation, Uttar Pradesh to conduct an inquiry against officers who were responsible for filing appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 which were filed after a delay of 513 days. While dismissing the appeals filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the …

Arbitration Act | When Parties Engage In Constant Communication, Unjust To Dismiss Claim Solely On Grounds Of Being Time-Barred: Calcutta High Court
1 year ago

Arbitration Act | When Parties Engage In Constant Communication, Unjust To Dismiss Claim Solely On Grounds Of Being Time-Barred: Calcutta High Court

Live Law  

The Calcutta High Court single bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya held that it would be an unnatural construction of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 where a party with a bona fide and a genuine claim is left in the lurch on the defence of the claim being barred by limitation. Brief Facts: The Petitioner approached the …

Limitation Act | Doesn't Encompass Long Delays, Condonation Only In Exceptional Cases: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Section 37 A&C Petition
1 year ago

Limitation Act | Doesn't Encompass Long Delays, Condonation Only In Exceptional Cases: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Section 37 A&C Petition

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court single bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not encompass long delays, and condonation can only be granted in exceptional cases where the appellant acted in a bona fide manner and not negligently. Furthermore, the High Court emphasized the applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act to …

Even If Arbitral Award Set Aside For Non-Compliance With Section 12, Parties Can File Fresh Section 11 Application For Arbitrator Appointment: Delhi High Court
1 year ago

Even If Arbitral Award Set Aside For Non-Compliance With Section 12, Parties Can File Fresh Section 11 Application For Arbitrator Appointment: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held that mere invalidation or unenforceability of the arbitrator appointment process does not render the entire arbitration clause void. The bench held that even if an arbitration award is set aside due to unilateral appointment and non-compliance with Section 12 of the Arbitration Act, fundamental agreement between the parties …

[LARR Act, 2013] Kerala High Court Declines To Condone Delay In Filing Appeal After Expiry Of Maximum Period Of 120 Days
1 year, 1 month ago

[LARR Act, 2013] Kerala High Court Declines To Condone Delay In Filing Appeal After Expiry Of Maximum Period Of 120 Days

Live Law  

The Kerala High Court has stated that the maximum time period for filing an appeal against an award as per Section 74 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation & Resettlement Act, 2013 is 120 days. The Division Bench comprising Justice A.Muhamed Mustaque and Justice Shoba Annamma Eapen while declining to condone the delay in …

Discover Related