Mere Reference Of Dispute To Arbitration Does Not Preclude The High Court From Examining Issue Of Stamp Duty In A Writ Petition: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has allowed a writ petition enabling the petitioner to approach the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority to adjudicate/decide on the amount payable on the instrument despite the reference of the dispute arising out of the instrument to arbitration under Section 8 of the A&C Act. The bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad held that merely because the...

Group Of Companies Doctrine Cannot Be Applied To Directors Of A Company To Make Them A Party To Arbitration: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that directors of a company cannot be made parties to arbitration through 'Group of Companies' doctrine. It held that the relationship between the company and its director(s) is that of the 'Principal' and 'Agent' as defined under Section 182 of the Indian Contract Act. The bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held that in terms of Section 230 of...

A Party Cannot Challenge An Arbitral Award After Receiving Amount Payable Under It: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that a party that has received payment in terms of an arbitral award cannot challenge the award with respect to the disallowed claims. The bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula held that acceptance of payments under the award would estop a party from challenging the award. It held that party after receiving payment cannot repudiate part award detrimental to...

Award Cannot Be Challenged On Ground Of Unilateral Appointment Of Arbitrator If Appointment Was Not Contested Earlier: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that a party cannot challenge an arbitral award on the ground of the unilateral appointment of the arbitrator if it did not challenge the appointment at an earlier stage.The bench of Justices Suresh Kumar Kait and Neena Bansal Krishna upheld an arbitral award passed by a unilaterally appointed arbitrator by observing that aggrieved party did not challenge...

Order Of Arbitrator Rejecting Application U/S 16 Of The A&C Act Cannot Be Challenged In A Writ Petition: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The High Court of Madhya Pradesh held that an order of the arbitral tribunal rejecting a challenge to its jurisdiction under Section 16 of the A&C Act is not challengeable in a writ petition. The bench of Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari held that a party aggrieved by the rejection of its application under Section 16 of the AC& Act has to wait till the passing of...

Reduction Of Interest Is Nothing But Modification Of Original Arbitration Award: Allahabad High Court Quashes Section 34 Order

The Allahabad High Court has held that the District Judge exercising jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not have the power to modify an award. The Court held that though parts of an award can be severed and set aside, provided such severance does not affect the remaining award.“Reduction of interest is nothing but a modification of the...

Delhi High Court Halts PCA Arbitration Over Arbitrator Appointment Breach

The High Court of Delhi has stayed a PCA Arbitration between an African and an Indian Entity due to the constitution of the tribunal in violation of the arbitration agreement. The bench of Justice Anup J. Bhambhani, dealing with a suit seeking anti-arbitration injunction and an application seeking ad-interim injunction, restrained the defendant from proceeding further with the...

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: 15th January To 21st January 2024

Supreme Court Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Validity Of Section 3G Of National Highways Act Case Title: B.D. Vivek v. Union of India, Writ Petition Civil No. 1364 of 2023 The Supreme Court Bench of Justices B.V. Nagrathna and Ujjal Bhuyan has issued notice on a writ petition challenging the Constitutional Validity of Section 3G of the National Highways...

A Party Cannot Insist On Fulfilment Of Pre-Arbitral Steps After Terminating The Contract: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that a party cannot insist on fulfilment of pre-arbitration conciliation once it has itself terminated the agreement. It held that pre-arbitration conciliation provided in the agreement falls with the termination of the agreement. The bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh held that once a party has itself proceeded to terminate the agreement...

Limitation Period For Appointment Of A Substitute Arbitrator Is 3 Years From The Date When The Right To Apply For Fresh Appointment Accrues: Delhi High Court

The High Court of Delhi has held that the limitation period for the appointment of the substitute arbitrator is 3 years from the date when the right to apply for such appointment accrues. The bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh held that since the act does not provide for any explicit period for the appointment of a substitute arbitrator, the limitation shall be governed by the...

Issues Related To Bias Of An Arbitrator And Conduct Of Arbitral Proceedings Cannot Be Determined Under Section 29A Of The A&C Act: Delhi High Court Reiterates

The High Court of Delhi has held that an issue related to the bias of an arbitrator in conducting the arbitral proceedings cannot be determined by a Court while dealing with the application under Section 29A of the A&C Act. The bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh reiterated that the scope of Court's power under Section 29A is limited to the examination of whether the extension...

Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Validity Of Section 3G Of National Highways Act

The Supreme Court Bench of Justices B.V. Nagrathna and Ujjal Bhuyan has issued notice on a writ petition challenging the Constitutional Validity of Section 3G of the National Highways Act, 1956. The writ petition questions the legality of Section 3G(5) of the Act. This section mandates arbitration to resolve disputes over the compensation amount payable to landowners when their land...