Arbitration Weekly Round-Up [18th November To 24th November, 2024]

Supreme Court Case Title: GOQII TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS SOKRATI TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED, Citation : 2024 LiveLaw 891 In a recent decision, the Supreme Court reiterated that the referral courts under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 should refrain from conducting an in-depth factual analysis of the dispute. Delhi High Court Case Title: BALAJI STEEL TRADE versus FLUDOR BENIN S.A. AND ORS Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 1239 The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma affirmed that Section 45 of the Arbitration Act casts a statutory mandate on Courts to refer parties to an arbitration agreement to arbitration. Case Title:CENTAURUS GREEN ENERGY PRIVATE LIMITED versus RAJSHREE EDUCATIONAL TRUST Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 1245 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. Ltd. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 1257 The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad affirmed that under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act the Court cannot re-appreciate evidence and substitute its own conclusion to the one arrived at by the Arbitrator even though a different conclusion can be arrived at on re-appreciating evidence Case Title: Netaji Subhash Institute Of Technology Versus M/S Surya Engineers & Another Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 1263 The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh affirmed that once an arbitrator has taken a plausible view based on the facts of the case, such a view cannot be interfered with under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Punjab and Haryana High Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Reiterates Limited Scope For Interference U/S 34 & 37 Of Arbitration Act, Upholds Award In Land Development Dispute Case Title: Active Promoters Private Limited vs. Desh Raj and Others Case Number: FAO-CARB-3-2020 The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench of Justices Arun Palli and Vikram Aggarwal has reiterated that the scope of interference with an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is narrow, and the appellate jurisdiction under Section 37 is even more circumscribed.