Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 21 to 27 August 2023

Supreme Court Restores 1997 Arbitral Award Passed Under 1940 Act; Criticises HC & Trial Court For “Appellate Review”

Case Title: M/s S.D. Shinde vs Govt. of Maharashtra & Ors.

The Supreme Court, while restoring an arbitral award passed in 1997 which was set aside by the Trial Court and the High Court under the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940, has emphasised that the court’s jurisdiction under Section 30/33 of the 1940 Act never extended beyond discerning whether the award discloses an “error apparent on the face of the award” or not.

Dissenting Opinion Of An Arbitrator Cannot Be Treated As An Award If The Majority Award Is Set Aside : Supreme Court

Case Title: Hindustan Construction Company Limited vs National Highways Authority of India

The Supreme Court held that a dissenting opinion cannot be treated as an award if the majority award is set aside. In this case, a three member arbitration tribunal passed an award in a dispute between Hindustan Construction Company Limited and National Highways Authority of India.

High Courts:

Allahabad High Court:

‘Such Dead Claim Ought Not To Be Revived’: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Application For Appointment Of Arbitrator Filed After 20 Yrs

Case Title: Gurucharan Das vs Tribhuvan Pal & Ors.

The Allahabad High Court recently dismissed an application for the appointment of an arbitrator filed under Section 11(4) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 2016 holding that such application being filed after 20 years of occurrence of dispute is barred by delay and laches.

Calcutta High Court:

Holistic, Common-Sense Approach Required To Interpret Arbitration Clause: Calcutta HC Grants Interim Relief To US-Based Healthcare Company

Case Title: Case: Uphealth Holdings Inc. vs Glocal Healthcare Systems Pvt Ltd & Ors.

The Calcutta High Court while exercising its admiralty jurisdiction, recently allowed an application for interim relief by Uphealth Holdings Inc. a wholly owned subsidiary of Uphealth Inc., a US-based healthcare company under section 9 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996. Justice Ravi Kishan Kapur observed that the applicant had made out a prima facie case for interim relief regarding an arbitrable dispute over its Share-Purchase Agreement (“SPA”) with the respondent.

Delhi High Court:

Recourse To Section 34(4) Of The A&C Act Can Only Be Taken For Curable Defects; Courts Cannot Allow The Tribunal To Either Review Or Reconsider The Award: Delhi High Court

Case Title: NHAI vs Trichy Thanjavur Expressway Ltd

The High Court of Delhi has held that the recourse to Section 34(4) of the A&C Act, that grants court the authority to remit an arbitral award to the Arbitral Tribunal, can only be taken for correcting the curable defects such as filling the gaps in reasoning, correct typographical and arithmetical errors and not to allow the tribunal to do a review of the award.

Courts Can Partially Set Aside An Arbitration Award, Doctrine Of Severability Is Enshrined Under Section 34 Of The A&C Act: Delhi High Court

Case Title: NHAI vs Trichy Thanjavur Expressway Ltd

The Delhi High Court has held that the Courts exercising powers under Section 34 of the A&C Act has the power to partially set aside an arbitration award to strike off the offending portion of the award while retaining the remaining award.

Court Can Receive The Deficient/Requisite Stamp Duty Itself, Requirement To Send The Impounded Agreement To Collector Of Stamps Not Mandatory: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Splendor Landbase Ltd vs Aparna Ashram Society

The Delhi High Court while reiterating that it is mandatory for the Court exercising power under Section 11 of the A&C Act to impound the non-stamped or insufficiently stamped agreement held that the Court can itself collect the deficient/requisite stamp duty under Section 35 of the Stamps Act, 1899 and enable deposit of the requisite stamp duty along with penalty as contemplated under proviso (a) to Section 35 of the Stamp Act.

True Or Certified Copy Of The Original Arbitration Agreement Can Be Filed When The Issue Of Stamp Duty Is Not Disputed: Delhi High Court

Case Title: Splendor Landbase Ltd vs Aparna Ashram Society

The Delhi High Court has held that the true or certified copy of the agreement containing the arbitration agreement would be sufficient for the purpose of Section 11 petition when on the face of it, the same is duly stamped and a statement to this effect is made in the petition under Section 11 of the Act, and the same is not controverted by the opposite party.

Rajasthan High Court:

Dispute Not Resolved By Friendly Consultation As Per Agreement: Rajasthan High Court Appoints Arbitrator

Case Title: Kapil Jain & Ors. vs Khosla Electronics Pvt Ltd

The Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur recently allowed an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an arbitrator, on the ground that the Lease Agreement entered between the parties provided the mechanism to resolve the dispute by ‘friendly consultation’ and the respondent did not participate and make any effort to resolve the dispute by way of ‘friendly consultation’.