Arbitration
[Arbitration Act] For Condonation Of Delay In Filing Section 34, Party Is Obligated To Reveal Bonafidies Coupled With Plausible Reasons: Himachal Pradesh High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court single bench of Justice Satyen Vaidya held that for showing sufficient cause as required under the proviso to Section 34 (3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the party is obligated to reveal their bonafidies coupled with plausible reason in not filing the application within the prescribed time. Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, deals with the time limit for filing an application to set aside an arbitral award. ...
Interpretation Of Agreement By Arbitrator Cannot Be Interfered Merely Because Another View Could Have Been Taken: Himachal Pradesh High Court
The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Satyen Vaidya held that in case the interpretation of the relevant clause of agreement as arrived at by the Arbitrator was possible and plausible, the same cannot be interfered with merely because another view could have been taken. The bench referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in UHL Power Company Ltd. versus State of Himachal Pradesh, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 18 and held that the jurisdiction of the court under Section 34 of the...
Proper Recourse Against Arbitral Proceeding Under MSMED Act Is Application u/s 18(3) Of MSMED Act Or u/s 16 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court division bench of Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora held that the proper recourse against proceedings under the MSMED Act is to file an application under Section 18(3) of the MSMED Act or Section 16 of the Arbitration Act. Further, the bench held that in case an award has been passed, then the proper recourse is to file objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Section 18(3) of MSMED Act: “(3) Where the...
Allegations Against Arbitral Tribunal Without Any Basis Is Contrary To Letter And Spirit Of Arbitral Process: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh held that making allegations against the Arbitral Tribunal without any basis is contrary to the letter and spirit of the arbitral process. Brief Facts: The matter pertained to an Engineering, Procurement, and Construction agreement (EPC) made between the NHAI and M/S Kcc Buildcon Pvt. Ltd. (“Respondent”). Dispute...
Arbitration Monthly Digest - April 2024
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 [APPEAL UNDER SECTION 37 OF ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 DEFECTIVE No. - 89 of 2024] The Allahabad High Court has directed...
Arbitration Weekly Round Up: 22nd April to 28th April 2024
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. Ltd. 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 266 The Allahabad High Court division bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh held that expression “in the manner directed...
Court Under Section 9 Of A&C Act Can Punish For Disobedience Of Its Order, Power Akin To Order 39 Rule 2A Of CPC: Calcutta High Court
The High Court of Calcutta has held that the Court under Section 9 of the A&C Act can punish for the disobedience of its order. It held that its power under Section 9 is similar to the Civil Court's power under Order 39 Rule 2A of CPC which provides that the Court can attach the property of disobeying party as well as sentence it to imprisonment for up to 3 months.The bench of...
Section 23(4) of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996: Mandatory or Directory ?
Speedy adjudicationis at the heart of arbitration. To achieve this objective which is innate to the very concept of arbitration, the legislature, through a series of amendments has introduced provisions which have shifted the paradigm and patently altered the landscape of arbitration in India. This article proposes to discuss whether the timelines contemplated in Section 23(4)...
Arbitration Act | Executing Courts Must Pass Well-Reasoned And Articulated Decisions Specially In Disputes Involving Computation Of Due Amount: Telangana High Court
The Telangana High Court division bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti set aside an order passed by the executing court noting that it was arrived in a cryptic and cavalier manner without providing explanation or reasoning. It held that since the dispute between the parties was about the computation of the amount due and payable under the arbitral award,...
Under Section 33 Of The A&C Act, The Arbitrator Can Interpret Its Original Award And Give An Additional Award: Gujarat High Court
The High Court of Gujarat has held that after an award is delivered by the arbitrator, it can entertain an application under Section 33 of the A&C Act and correct any typographical errors or provide an interpretation on the award by making an additional award.The bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee held that the arbitrator can provide calculations by way of...
Arbitration Clause In Terms & Conditions (T&C) On A Website Is Binding On The Parties If The Digital Agreement Incorporated Hyperlink To Such T&C: Delhi High Court
The High Court of Delhi has held that an arbitration clause contained in the terms and conditions available on the website of a company would get incorporated in the agreement between the parties if the agreement makes an express reference and provide a hyperlink to T&Cs. The bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Ravinder Dudeja held that such an incorporation of arbitration...
Mandate Of The Arbitral Tribunal Can Only Be Extended By The High Court If The Tribunal Was Constituted Pursuant To Directions Under Section 11(6) Of The A&C Act: Meghalaya High Court
The Bench of Justice H.S. Thangkhiew of Meghalaya High Court has held that the mandate of the arbitral tribunal can only be extended by the High Court under Section 29A of the A&C Act if the tribunal was constituted pursuant to the directions issued by the Court under Section 11(6) of the Act.The Court held that though the Court may have directed the nominee arbitrators of the parties...