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, 2 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, seeking appointment of arbitrator, has accrued to the petitioner after expiry of one month from the date the communication/ letter of request for appointment of arbitrator which was served upon respondents on 05.10.2001” the court said. The court also noted that the petitioner himself has pleaded in the appeal filed against the dismissal order passed in application under Section 9 of the Act, that notice was served upon the respondent-Executive Engineer on 05.10.2001, but still the petitioner slept over the matter for a long period of more than twenty two years and filed the petition at hand on 12.05.2023. The court added that keeping in view the ratio laid down by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid decisions, it is emphatically clear that the period of limitation to file an application under Section 11 seeking appointment of arbitrator is three years from the date of refusal to appoint the arbitrator or on expiry of thirty days from the date of service of notice. “In the present case the petitioner after serving the letter of request invoking arbitration clause on 05.10.2001 filed the present petition on 12.05.2023 after a lapse of more than twenty two years” the court observed.

Court Cause Period Date Act Petition Appointment Present Respondents Three Years Petitioner Arbitrator Section 11  entertained  appointment  present  respondents  period  arbitrator  lapse  yrs  act  high  petition  court  arising  petitioner  cause  date  jk

History of this topic

Arbitrator's Mandate Can Be Extended If Non-Completion Of Proceedings In 12 Months Is Due To Delays Not Attributable To Petitioner: Himachal Pradesh HC
2 days, 21 hours ago

Arbitrator's Mandate Can Be Extended If Non-Completion Of Proceedings In 12 Months Is Due To Delays Not Attributable To Petitioner: Himachal Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Ranjan Sharma has held that the mandate of the Arbitrator can be extended under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 if the arbitral proceedings are not completed within 12 months due to reasons not attributable to the petitioner, as failing to do so would cause grave prejudice to the …

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
1 week, 2 days 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 …

Filing Written Statement Does Not Waive Right To Arbitration If Preliminary Objection Is Raised At Outset: Jammu & Kashmir High Court
1 week, 2 days ago

Filing Written Statement Does Not Waive Right To Arbitration If Preliminary Objection Is Raised At Outset: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

Live Law  

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court bench of Justice Rajnesh Oswal held that mere filing of the written statement in a suit does not constitute a waiver of right to arbitration if the party has raised a preliminary objection in respect of the arbitration clause at the outset. The High Court also noted that the Respondents didn't waive their right …

Withdrawal Of MSMED Council Application Does Not Preclude Arbitration U/S 11, Even Without Council's Response: Delhi High Court
1 week, 3 days 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
2 weeks 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 …

[Arbitration Act] Limitation Does Not Stop If Initial Filing Is Non Est, Date Of Filing Must Be Reckoned From Date Of Refiling: Delhi HC
3 weeks ago

[Arbitration Act] Limitation Does Not Stop If Initial Filing Is Non Est, Date Of Filing Must Be Reckoned From Date Of Refiling: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri has reiterated that the filing of the arbitral award under challenge along with application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is not a mere procedural formality but an essential requirement and non-filing of the same would make the application non est in the eyes of law. The …

Party Cannot Be Forced To Accept Arbitrator Who Has Conflict Of Interest, Violates Principles Of Natural Justice And Fair Trial: J&K High Court
3 weeks, 1 day ago

Party Cannot Be Forced To Accept Arbitrator Who Has Conflict Of Interest, Violates Principles Of Natural Justice And Fair Trial: J&K High Court

Live Law  

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court held that a party could not be forced to accept an arbitrator who has a conflict of interest, as the same would violate the principles of a fair trial. The court, therefore, appointed a former District & Sessions Judge as the independent sole arbitrator, who would proceed to hear the dispute and pass a …

[Arbitration Act] Pre-Referral Jurisdiction Of Court U/S 11(6) Includes Inquiry On Whether Claims Are Ex-Facie & Hopelessly Time Barred: Calcutta HC
3 weeks, 3 days ago

[Arbitration Act] Pre-Referral Jurisdiction Of Court U/S 11(6) Includes Inquiry On Whether Claims Are Ex-Facie & Hopelessly Time Barred: Calcutta HC

Live Law  

The Calcutta High Court Bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that while the scope of adjudication by referral court is limited and entails a mere examination of whether the arbitration agreement exists or not, the referral court is not precluded from examining whether the claim is deadwood or ex facie barred. As per the decision of the Apex Court …

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, 1 week 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 …

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, 2 weeks 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 …

Court Having Jurisdiction Over Seat Of Arbitration Would Be Entitled To Entertain Petition U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Jharkhand High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Court Having Jurisdiction Over Seat Of Arbitration Would Be Entitled To Entertain Petition U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Jharkhand High Court

Live Law  

The Jharkhand High Court bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi has held that the court having jurisdiction over the seat of Arbitration would be entitled to entertain a petition under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. The opposite party challenged the maintainability of section 34 petition on the ground that since the arbitrator had been appointed by the Orissa High …

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 …

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up [20th January-26th January 2025]
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up [20th January-26th January 2025]

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Detail : M/S R.S. High Courts Bombay High Court Case Title: Health Care, Medical & General Stores Versus Amulya Investment,Through Proprietor Mr. Sameer G. Narvekar Citation: 2025 LiveLaw 23 The Bombay High Court bench of Justices A.S. Chandurkar and Rajesh S. Patil has held that service of a signed copy of an award on an employee of …

[S.16 Arbitration Act] Jurisdiction Of Tribunal Cannot Be Challenged After Submission Of Defence: Allahabad High Court
1 month, 3 weeks 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 …

Court Cannot Assume Jurisdiction To Appoint Arbitrator Unless Request For Reference Of Dispute Is Received By Respondent: Bombay High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Court Cannot Assume Jurisdiction To Appoint Arbitrator Unless Request For Reference Of Dispute Is Received By Respondent: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice R. M. Joshi has held that compliance with Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is mandatory and that the court cannot assume jurisdiction to appoint an Arbitrator under Section 11 unless a request for a reference of dispute is received by the respondent. The present application was filed under Section …

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 …

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 …

Pendency Of Civil Or Criminal Litigation Between Partners Cannot Estop Either Partner From Invoking Arbitration Clause: Punjab and Haryana HC
2 months, 1 week ago

Pendency Of Civil Or Criminal Litigation Between Partners Cannot Estop Either Partner From Invoking Arbitration Clause: Punjab and Haryana HC

Live Law  

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench of Justice Suvir Sehgal has held that pendency of a civil and criminal litigation inter se partners, cannot estop one of the partners from invoking the arbitration clause or bar the reference of dispute for adjudication to an arbitrator for determination. It was also argued that petitioner responded by sending a reply dated …

Application For Extension Of Time Cannot Be Dismissed Due To Mentioning S.151 Of CPC Instead Of S. 29A Of Arbitration Act: Himachal Pradesh HC
2 months, 1 week ago

Application For Extension Of Time Cannot Be Dismissed Due To Mentioning S.151 Of CPC Instead Of S. 29A Of Arbitration Act: Himachal Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Rakesh Kainthla has held that it is well-settled law that mere mentioning of an incorrect provision is not fatal to the application if the power to pass such an order is available with the court. Brief Facts: The applicant/petitioner has filed an application under Section 151 of CPC for extension of time …

No Bar To Avail Remedy U/S 9 Of Arbitration Act Even Against Non-Parties To Subject Matter Of Dispute: Delhi High Court
2 months, 2 weeks ago

No Bar To Avail Remedy U/S 9 Of Arbitration Act Even Against Non-Parties To Subject Matter Of Dispute: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna has held that the Plaintiffs are not barred from availing the remedy under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 even against individual/entities who are not party to the Family Settlement out of which the dispute arose. The application for ad interim injunction was held to be not …

Arbitration Cases Annual Digest 2024
2 months, 3 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, 3 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 …

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 …

Arbitration Weekly Round Up [9th December To 15th December 2024]
3 months, 1 week ago

Arbitration Weekly Round Up [9th December To 15th December 2024]

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case : Kirpal Singh Vs Government Of India Citation : 2024 LiveLaw 970 The Supreme Court has held that Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is applicable to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Case Title: Avtar Krishan Suri V/s The Estate Manager, J&K Small Scale Industries Development Corporation Ltd. Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 336 The Jammu & …

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 …

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up: December 9 - December 15, 2024
3 months, 1 week ago

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up: December 9 - December 15, 2024

Live Law  

Nominal Index: Anand Vs Union of India 2024 LiveLaw 330 Shakeel Mohd Vs UT Of J&K 2024 LiveLaw 331 M/s Mir Sons Constructions Pvt. Ltd Vs. Union Territory of J&K 2024 LiveLaw 332 Govind Ram Vs Vidhya Devi 2024 LiveLaw 333 Pawan Singh Rathore Vs Devinder Singh Katoch 2024 LiveLaw 334 Shabnam Soodan Vs Seema Gupta 2024 LiveLaw 335 Avtar …

Appointment Of Managing Director/Chairman Of Party As Arbitrator Is Prohibited U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: J&K High Court
3 months, 1 week ago

Appointment Of Managing Director/Chairman Of Party As Arbitrator Is Prohibited U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: J&K High Court

Live Law  

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan has held that managing director or chairman of a party to the arbitration agreement cannot be appointed as Arbitrator in light of section 12 read with Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration Act. The petitioner submitted that the appointment of Managing Director/Chairman of the respondent as Arbitrator …

S. 14 Limitation Act Applicable To Arbitration & Conciliation Act : Supreme Court
3 months, 2 weeks ago

S. 14 Limitation Act Applicable To Arbitration & Conciliation Act : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court has held that Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is applicable to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.Section 14 of the Limitation Act provides for the exclusion of the time spent in pursuing bona fide proceedings in a wrong forum from the computation of the period of limitation.A bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Manoj …

Referral Court U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Enter Into Merits Of Subject Matter Of Disputes: Rajasthan High Court
Trending News
3 months, 2 weeks ago

Referral Court U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Enter Into Merits Of Subject Matter Of Disputes: Rajasthan High Court

Live Law  

The Rajasthan High Court bench of Justice Sudesh Bansal has held that the court under section 11 of the Arbitration Act cannot enter into merits of subject matter of the disputes. It submitted that since the disputes/ differences have arisen between the parties, due to noncompliance of the collaboration agreement, which are arbitral in nature and an arbitration agreement incorporated …

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. …

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 …

Section 29A Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996: Complications More Than Cure
3 months, 2 weeks ago

Section 29A Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996: Complications More Than Cure

Live Law  

This article is an attempt to highlight the complexities involved under Section 29A of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. Ltd. v. General Manager & Anr., reiterated the principle that the extension of mandate under Section 29A shall be only for a “sufficient cause”. In Larsen and Toubro Ltd. v. IIC Limited and Anr., it is held by the Delhi …

[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, 3 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 …

Two Arbitration Petitions For Same Relief Cannot Be Filed: Chhattisgarh High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Two Arbitration Petitions For Same Relief Cannot Be Filed: Chhattisgarh High Court

Live Law  

The Chhattisgarh High Court bench of Chief Justice Mr. Ramesh Sinha has held that two arbitration petitions for the same relief cannot be filed. The members of the applicant Society are the lessees of the respondent, a registered private Company and all the individual members have entered into lease agreement for transfer of individual shop. It also submitted that despite …

Interest On Awarded Amount Cannot Exceed Rate Of 6% As Provided U/S 30(7) Of J&K Arbitration Act: High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Interest On Awarded Amount Cannot Exceed Rate Of 6% As Provided U/S 30(7) Of J&K Arbitration Act: High Court

Live Law  

The Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court bench of Justice M A Chowdhary has held that section 30 of the Jammu and Kashmir Arbitration Act, 1997 which was amended in 2010 is retrospective in nature. It was further submitted that Section 31 of the J&K Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1997 provided for grant of interest by the arbitrator for …

Arbitration Monthly Digest: November, 2024
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Monthly Digest: 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 …

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 …

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 …

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. …

Petition Filed After Expiry Of Limitation Period U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Entertained Unless Sufficient Cause Is Shown: Himachal Pradesh HC
4 months ago

Petition Filed After Expiry Of Limitation Period U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Entertained Unless Sufficient Cause Is Shown: Himachal Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua has held that petition under section 34 of the Arbitration Act cannot be entertained which is filed beyond the prescribed period of 3 months under section 34 of the Act in the absence of sufficient cause being shown. Observations: The court, at the outset, noted that as per Section …

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 …

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 18 - November 24, 2024
4 months ago

Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court Weekly Round-Up: November 18 - November 24, 2024

Live Law  

Nominal Index: Presentation Convent Senior Secondary School Vs Satvinder Singh 2024 LiveLaw 311 Joginder Singh Vs State & Ors 2024 LiveLaw 312 M/s Mir Associates Construction Company Vs. Superintending Engineer Hydraulic Circle Doda and Anr 2024 LiveLaw 313 M/s Pardeep Electricals and Building Pvt. Vs. Union of India and Ors 2024 LiveLaw 314 Mohd Azam Vs UT Of J&K 2024 …

Discover Related