Arbitrator's Order Determining Substantive Rights Of Parties Constitutes “Award”, Amenable To Challenge U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC
2 months ago

Arbitrator's Order Determining Substantive Rights Of Parties Constitutes “Award”, Amenable To Challenge U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur has held that orders passed by the Arbitrator during the pendency of Arbitral proceedings, which finally determines any substantive rights of the parties, constitutes an interim Arbitral Award, and can be challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court referred to IFFCO Ltd. v. Bhadra Products which held that the Arbitral Tribunal can make an interim arbitral Award on any matter with respect to which it may make a final Award; and the term “matter” in Section 31 of the A&C Act includes any point of dispute between the parties which has to be answered by the Arbitral Tribunal. In MBL Infrastructure Ltd. v. Rites Limited & Anr., it was observed: “A decision of an Arbitral Tribunal which brings a quietus to an issue before it and is an order which the Arbitral Tribunal is empowered to pass at the final stage would constitute an interim award within the meaning of Section 31 as also Section 34 of the Act.” In Goyal MG Gases Pvt. The court held that the decision dated 18.11.2010, insofar as it decided the issue as to whether the Crampons supplied by M/s JAMDPAL & Co. were incompatible with the boots supplied by the appellant, is a substantial and final findings on facts determining a dispute and substantive rights of the parties and amounts to “Arbitral Award” and, therefore, amenable to a challenge under Section 34 of the A&C Act.

Court Parties Order Decision Single Award Challenge Dated Interim Arbitrator Impugned Appellant Arbitral Section 34 Substantive Rights  order  challenge  arbitral  arbitrator  hc  delhi  rights  determining  award  parties  interim  dated  substantive  decision  constitutes  court  appellant

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
5 days, 7 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
5 days, 8 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
5 days, 11 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 …

Arbitration Clause Cannot Be Invoked Again Over Matters Which Have Already Been Adjudicated: Karnataka High Court
2 weeks, 1 day ago

Arbitration Clause Cannot Be Invoked Again Over Matters Which Have Already Been Adjudicated: Karnataka High Court

Live Law  

The Karnataka High Court has said the Arbitration clause in the lease agreement cannot be invoked for matters that have already been adjudicated upon and concluded by both the Arbitral Tribunal and the competent courts. The respondent challenged the award before the jurisdictional District and Sessions Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which set aside …

Failure To Attach Impugned Arbitral Award Along With Section 34 Application Would Render Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court
Trending News
1 month ago

Failure To Attach Impugned Arbitral Award Along With Section 34 Application Would Render Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

Submissions: The counsel for the appellant made the following submissions: Section 34 of the A&C Act does not mandate the filing of the arbitral award. The counsel for the respondent made the following submissions: This Court consistently held that non-fling of the impugned arbitral award would render the filing u/s 34 of the A&C Act as “non-est,” as the Court …

Failure To Attach Impugned Arbitral Award Along With Section 34 Application Would Render Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court
Trending News
1 month ago

Failure To Attach Impugned Arbitral Award Along With Section 34 Application Would Render Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

Submissions: The counsel for the appellant made the following submissions: Section 34 of the A&C Act does not mandate the filing of the arbitral award. The counsel for the respondent made the following submissions: This Court consistently held that non-fling of the impugned arbitral award would render the filing u/s 34 of the A&C Act as “non-est,” as the Court …

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 …

Award Passed By Improperly Appointed Arbitrator Is Non-Est In Law And Invalid: Delhi High Court
Trending News
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Award Passed By Improperly Appointed Arbitrator Is Non-Est In Law And Invalid: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that it is settled law that the Arbitrator is a creature of the contract and has to function within four corners of contract. As per the Arbitration Clause, the General Manager/Business Unit Head was the named Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. However, the respondent on 20.12.2010 …

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 …

Appointment Of Arbitrator In International Commercial Arbitration By HC Does Not Vitiate Award: Delhi High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Appointment Of Arbitrator In International Commercial Arbitration By HC Does Not Vitiate Award: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar has held that the appointment of the Arbitrator in an International Commercial Arbitration by the Chief Justice of the High Court, does not vitiate the impugned award. Observation of the Court: The High Court dealt with three key issues: Whether the appointment of the Arbitrator was in accordance with the …

Arbitration Act | Appellate Courts Can't Reassess Awards, Must Limit Enquiry On Public Policy Breach : Supreme Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Act | Appellate Courts Can't Reassess Awards, Must Limit Enquiry On Public Policy Breach : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court reaffirmed that arbitral awards should only be interfered with in cases of perversity, violation of public policy, or patent illegality. It emphasized that appellate courts cannot reassess the merits of awards and must limit their inquiry to whether the award breaches Section 34 of the Arbitration Act i.e., if the award is against the public policy of …

Arbitration Act | Courts' Jurisdiction Under Sections 34 and 37 Do Not Extend To Modifying Arbitral Award: Supreme Court Reiterates
1 month, 3 weeks 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 …

Additional Evidence Can Only Be Allowed In Exceptional Circumstances While Deciding Plea U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Chhattisgarh HC
2 months ago

Additional Evidence Can Only Be Allowed In Exceptional Circumstances While Deciding Plea U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Chhattisgarh HC

Live Law  

The Chhattisgarh High Court bench of Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey has held that additional evidence not forming part of the arbitral record can be allowed to be given only in exceptional circumstances while hearing a petition under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts: The petitioner challenges an order passed by the commercial court by which an application under …

Award Passed After Inordinate And Unexplained Delay Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court
2 months ago

Award Passed After Inordinate And Unexplained Delay Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court

Live Law  

The Madras High Court bench of Justice P.B. Balaji has held that inordinate and unexplained delay in passing the arbitral award can be a ground to set it aside under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. The court noted that in Harji Engineering Works Private Limited v. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, the Delhi High Court while referring to the UNCITRAL …

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

Expert Tribunal's Award Did Not Suffer From Patent Illegality, Cannot Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
2 months, 1 week ago

Expert Tribunal's Award Did Not Suffer From Patent Illegality, Cannot Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Dharmesh Sharma has held that the scope of interference by the Court with the arbitral award under Section 34 is very limited, and the Court is not supposed to travel beyond the aforesaid scope to determine whether the award is good or bad. In the present case, the court …

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 …

Date Of Receipt Of Corrected Award Would Be Taken As Disposal Date U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act, Even When Application U/S 33 Has Been Filed: Delhi HC
2 months, 1 week ago

Date Of Receipt Of Corrected Award Would Be Taken As Disposal Date U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act, Even When Application U/S 33 Has Been Filed: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that taking the date of receipt of the corrected award as the starting point and not as the date of disposal would actually go contrary to the plain reading of Section 34 of the Act. However, the respondent argued that in the present case the terminus quo for calculating …

Delhi HC Upholds Limited Judicial Interference In Arbitral Awards, Dismisses S.34 Plea Challenging Award Of ₹77.96 Crore In Telecom Dispute
2 months, 3 weeks ago

Delhi HC Upholds Limited Judicial Interference In Arbitral Awards, Dismisses S.34 Plea Challenging Award Of ₹77.96 Crore In Telecom Dispute

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has observed that it is no longer res integra that while dealing with the objections under Section 34, a court does not sit in appeal over the arbitral award. The court observed that under Section 35, an award can be set aside only if the petitioner establishes that the parties …

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
2 months, 3 weeks 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 …

S. 33 Arbitration Act | Clarification On Award Can Be Issued Even After Arbitral Tribunal Becomes Functus Officio : Supreme Court
3 months ago

S. 33 Arbitration Act | Clarification On Award Can Be Issued Even After Arbitral Tribunal Becomes Functus Officio : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court observed that although the Arbitral Tribunal becomes functus officio after passing an award, it would still retain the limited jurisdiction to clarify or correct errors in an award under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan dismissed the appeal filed against the Delhi High Court's …

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

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, 2 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, 2 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 …

Limited Scope Of Examination U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act, Award Vitiated By Patent Illegality: Delhi High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Limited Scope Of Examination U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act, Award Vitiated By Patent Illegality: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Sachin Datta held that the Arbitral Tribunal has awarded the claim for loss of profit for the period the Contract was prolonged without any evidence or material to support the claim. Aggrieved by this, the Contractor filed an application under Section 34 of the Act before the Commercial Court …

Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Challenge Arbitral Award, Only To Circumvent Statutory Requirement Of S.19 Of MSMED Act: Delhi High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Challenge Arbitral Award, Only To Circumvent Statutory Requirement Of S.19 Of MSMED Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula, while hearing a writ petition challenging an arbitral award passed by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, has held that invoking the writ jurisdiction to challenge an arbitral award would circumvent the statutory requirement of pre-deposit u/s 19 of the MSMED Act, and would amount to defeating the legislative intent. …

Procedural Orders Cannot Be Considered As Interim Award Or Challenged U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Procedural Orders Cannot Be Considered As Interim Award Or Challenged U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that a procedural order given by an Arbitral Tribunal, such as rejecting an application seeking impleadment of a party, does not qualify as an interim award. However, that application was rejected by the Arbitral Tribunal and stated that the allegations against Rajesh Kumar Srivastava required evidence and could not …

Merit Based Review Of Arbitral Award Is Impermissible Under Section 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
4 months ago

Merit Based Review Of Arbitral Award Is Impermissible Under Section 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Sachin Datta affirmed that the scope of jurisdiction under Section 34 and Section 37 of the Act is not akin to normal appellate jurisdiction. In the impugned award, the learned sole Arbitrator, at the very outset, considered the divergent factual versions given by the parties as regards the alleged cash …

While Hearing Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act, Court Must Confine Itself To Grounds U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Himachal Pradesh HC
4 months ago

While Hearing Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act, Court Must Confine Itself To Grounds U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Himachal Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua affirmed that supervisory role of Courts is very restricted in dealing with appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act. The NHAI feeling aggrieved against the enhancement in the market value determined by the Arbitrator took recourse to Section 34 of the Act and filed applications assailing the …

Award Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act If Arbitrator Travels Beyond Arbitration Agreement: Madhya Pradesh HC
Trending News
4 months ago

Award Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act If Arbitrator Travels Beyond Arbitration Agreement: Madhya Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar affirmed that if arbitrator travels beyond the terms of the arbitration agreement while passing an award, such an award is liable to be set aside under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts This Arbitration Appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed …

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 …

Award Cannot Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act If View Taken By Arbitrator Is A Plausible View: Delhi High Court
4 months, 1 week ago

Award Cannot Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act If View Taken By Arbitrator Is A Plausible View: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that conduct of the parties has to be seen before granting equitable relief for specific performance of the contract. Brief Facts The present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 assails an arbitral award dated 12.04.2022, whereby the arbitral tribunal has refused to grant specific …

Inordinate, Unexplained Delay In Passing Award After Conclusion Of Arguments Can Be Ground To Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
4 months, 1 week ago

Inordinate, Unexplained Delay In Passing Award After Conclusion Of Arguments Can Be Ground To Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that inordinate and unexplained delay in passing an award from the date of the conclusion of the pleadings can be a ground to set it aside under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts The present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 assails …

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 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 …

Delhi High Court Grants Interim Measure to Protect Property From Being Wasted in Arbitration Case
5 months ago

Delhi High Court Grants Interim Measure to Protect Property From Being Wasted in Arbitration Case

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the court is not obligated to consider the merits or otherwise of the facts as stated by the litigants when exercising jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act. The court granted an interim measure to protect the property from being wasted or disposed of.

Bombay High Court Retains Exclusive Jurisdiction to Challenge Award Under Section 34 of Arbitration Act
5 months ago

Bombay High Court Retains Exclusive Jurisdiction to Challenge Award Under Section 34 of Arbitration Act

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the jurisdiction of the Court to hear the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) to challenge the award passed under Section 18(4) of the MSMED Act would be governed by the agreement between the parties which has conferred exclusive jurisdiction to a particular Court.

Bombay HC Revokes Exclusive Jurisdiction of Mumbai Court in Section 34 Application
5 months ago

Bombay HC Revokes Exclusive Jurisdiction of Mumbai Court in Section 34 Application

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the jurisdiction of the Court to hear the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) to challenge the award passed under Section 18(4) of the MSMED Act would be governed by the agreement between the parties which has conferred exclusive jurisdiction to a particular Court.

Arbitration Cases Monthly Digest: September 2024
5 months, 2 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 …

Arbitration Award Attains Status Of Civil Court Decree After Three Months If No Challenge Is Posed: J&K High Court
7 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Award Attains Status Of Civil Court Decree After Three Months If No Challenge Is Posed: J&K High Court

Live Law  

Emphasising the significance of the amended Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, which allows for the enforceability of non-stayed awards the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has ruled that an arbitration award attains the status of a civil court decree after three months if no challenge is posed. A bench of Justice Rahul Bharti observed, “… …

Interim Measures U/s 17 Of Arbitration Act Affecting Third-Party Rights Is Appealable: Delhi High Court
8 months ago

Interim Measures U/s 17 Of Arbitration Act Affecting Third-Party Rights Is Appealable: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that a third party, whose rights for a registered charge are affected by an arbitral award, can challenge such award under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Regarding the creation of charge, the High Court held that the Dalmia Group failed to demonstrate the existence of …

No Reappreciation Of Evidence Permitted Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act, Arbitrator's Views Must Be Respected: Orissa High Court
8 months, 3 weeks ago

No Reappreciation Of Evidence Permitted Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act, Arbitrator's Views Must Be Respected: Orissa High Court

Live Law  

The Orrisa High Court bench of Justice D. Dash held that in a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, reappreciating evidence is not allowed in order to replace the arbitrator's view with another. Observations by the High Court: The High Court referred to Section 37 of the Arbitration Act which states that an appeal can …

Arbitrator Failed To Deal With Material Contentions, Arbitral Award Would Not Satisfy The Requirement Of A Reasoned Award: Delhi High Court
11 months ago

Arbitrator Failed To Deal With Material Contentions, Arbitral Award Would Not Satisfy The Requirement Of A Reasoned Award: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi has held that when the arbitral tribunal fails to deal with submissions of a party on a contentious issue, the resultant award would not fulfil the requirements of a reasoned award as required under Section 31 of the A&C Act. It held that the tribunal cannot simply accept unquantified claims without assigning reasons and without …

An Award Issued By Unilaterally Appointed Arbitrator Can Be Contested For Invalidity Of Appointment, Even By The Appointing Party: Delhi High Court
11 months ago

An Award Issued By Unilaterally Appointed Arbitrator Can Be Contested For Invalidity Of Appointment, Even By The Appointing Party: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi has held that an award passed by a unilaterally appointed arbitrator can be challenged on ground of invalidity of such appointment and consequent lack of jurisdiction even by the party who made such an appointment. Analysis by the Court The Court relied observed that the Apex Court in Bharat Broadband Network Ltd. vs. United Telecom …

No Writ Against Order Of Tribunal Rejecting Application U/S 16 Of The A&C Act Unless It Shocks The Conscience Of The Court: Delhi High Court
11 months, 3 weeks ago

No Writ Against Order Of Tribunal Rejecting Application U/S 16 Of The A&C Act Unless It Shocks The Conscience Of The Court: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi has held that an order of the arbitral tribunal rejecting an application challenging its jurisdiction under Section 16 of the A&C Act cannot be challenged in a writ petition unless the order is so perverse that it shocks the conscience of the Court. During pendency of the arbitration proceedings, the petitioner moved an application under …

Unilateral Appointment Of Arbitrator By Party: Delhi High Cout Set Aside Arbitral Award As It Contravened Section 12(5) A&C And & 7th Schedule
11 months, 3 weeks ago

Unilateral Appointment Of Arbitrator By Party: Delhi High Cout Set Aside Arbitral Award As It Contravened Section 12(5) A&C And & 7th Schedule

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh held aside an arbitral award noting that the arbitrator was unilaterally appointed by the Respondent. The bench held that that the unilateral appointment of the Sole Arbitrator by Respondent was non-est in law, as it contravened Section 12 read with the Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. …

Non Filing Of Arbitral Award Along Section 34 Is A Fatal Defect, Makes Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court Dismisses Section 34 Petition
1 year ago

Non Filing Of Arbitral Award Along Section 34 Is A Fatal Defect, Makes Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court Dismisses Section 34 Petition

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Prateek Jalan held that non filing of the arbitral award along with the Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is a fatal defect, making such filing as non-est. Brief Facts: The Petitioner approached the Delhi High Court and filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration …

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 …

Discover Related