A Contractor Cannot Be Debarred Without Notice, Even If There Is A Provision For Deemed Debarment In The Contract Following Its Termination: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that a contract cannot be debarred or blacklisted without a prior notice or opportunity of hearing even in cases where there is a provision in the contract for deemed debarment in case of termination of the contract. The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh held that an order of debarment has a domino effect which of results in the civil death of an...

The Issue Of Limitation Is Also Part And Parcel Of The Arbitrable Point: Karnataka High Court

The bench of Justice C.M. Joshi of Karnataka High Court (Kalaburagi Bench) has held that the issue of limitation of claims is a part and parcel of the arbitrable point which can be decided by the arbitrator. The Court relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in BSNL v. Nortel Neworks, LL 2021 SC 153 wherein the Apex Court held that issue of limitation is a mixed question of law and...

1100 Crore Arbitral Award? Delhi High Court Adjourns Enforcement Proceedings On Central Govt's Request Subject To Rs 50K Cost

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday imposed Rs. 50,000 cost on Central government for seeking repeated adjournments in a petition for enforcement of an arbitral award, allegedly having a monetary value of over Rs.1100 crores.The bench of Justice Prateek Jalan noted that the Union had sought another adjournment despite the objections of party seeking enforcement and the assurance given by the Union...

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

High Courts Bombay High Court Can A Section 29A Application Be Filed In The Commercial Court Or Only In The High Court? Single Bench Of Bombay High Court Refers The Issue To Larger Bench The High Court of Bombay (Goa Bench) has referred the issue of maintainability of a Section 29A application seeking extension of the arbitration before the Commercial Court to a larger bench...

Evidence Taken Behind The Back Of A Party After Completion Of Arguments, Madras High Court Sets Aside Arbitration Award

The High Court of Madras has held that an arbitration award based on an evidence taken on record after the completion of arguments and behind the back of a party would be liable to be set aside under Section 34 of the A&C Act. The bench of Justices R. Subramanian and R. Sakthivel held that when an evidence is taken behind the back of a party and after the completion of arguments,...

Reference Under NHAI Act Dismissed For Default, Party Should Challenge Award Under Section 34 , Not By Writ : Patna High Court

The Bench of Justice Rajiv Roy of Patna High Court has held that a writ petition is not maintainable to challenge an order of Arbitrator dismissing reference under NHAI Act for default. It held that the aggrieved party should challenge the award under Section 34 of the Act. Facts The respondent (NHAI) had acquired the land of the petitioner after classifying it as 'Developing...

Court Under Section 19 Of MSMED Act, 2006 Empowered To Allow Predeposit In Installments: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court division bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Jaspreet Singh held that expression “in the manner directed by such court” in Section 19 of the Micro, Small And Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 gives the discretion to the court to allow the predeposit to be made, if felt necessary, in installments also. Section 19 of the...

When Plea Regarding Lack Of Jurisdiction Not Raised Before The Arbitrator, It Cannot Be Raised In Appeal: Madras High Court

The High Court of Madras has held that a plea regarding lack of jurisdiction or invalidity of the appointment of the arbitrator must be raised before the arbitrator during the arbitral proceedings. It held that if such a plea is not taken at the first instance or, the Court in appeal cannot entertain such an objection. The bench of Justices R. Subramanian and R. Sakthivel also held...

A Policy Circular Requiring Further Consent For Arbitration Cannot Be Construed As An Arbitration Clause: Calcutta High Court

The High Court of Calcutta has held that a policy circular issued by a parent company contemplating arbitration would not be an arbitration agreement if it requires fresh consent of the contractor to refer the dispute to arbitration. The bench of Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur held that when for existing contracts, the circular required consent of the contractor for reference to...

Baseless Allegations By Parties U/s 13(2), A&C Act Needlessly Tarnishes Reputation Of Arbitrators: Himachal Pradesh High Court

The Himachal Pradesh High Court single bench of Chief Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao held that there is a tendency of the parties to impugn the motives of Arbitrators without affording them the opportunity under Section 13(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It held that such baseless allegations and accusations could needlessly tarnish the reputation of Arbitrators...

Award By MSEF Council Cannot Be Challenged In Writ, Remedy Under Section 34 Of A&C Act Must Be Availed: Gujarat High Court

The bench of Justice Vaibhavi D. Nanavati of Gujarat High Court has held that an award passed by MSEF Council under Section 18 of the MSMED Act cannot be directly challenged in a writ petition and the aggrieved party has to challenge it under Section 34 of the A&C Act. The Court relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in India Glycols Ltd., Vs. Micro and Small...

Dispute Related Insolvency & Winding-Up Of Partnership Concerning Partners' Rights & Obligations Is Arbitrable: Telangana High Court Appoints Justice L. Nageswara Rao As Arbitrator

The Telangana High Court single bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe held that under Section 16(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 the arbitral tribunals have the power to rule on its own jurisdiction including deciding the non-arbitrability of a dispute. Further, the court held that disputes related to insolvency and winding-up of a partnership concerning partners'...