Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
In the matter at hand, the appellant contended that the Council’s award ought to have been interfered with under Article 226/227 of the Constitution, as there was no conciliation in accordance with the procedure prescribed, a condition precedent for initiation of arbitration proceeding under Section 18 (3) of the MSMED Act.
Calcutta High Court allowed Section 34 application of the railways and directed that the Court hearing Section 34 application should not be guided by any remarks made by the Judge in the impugned order.
“It is essential that there be illegalities or deficiencies at the face of the Award which shocks the conscience of the Court for it to qualify to be set aside by an act of this Court while adjudicating upon a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.”
India has long hoped to become an arbitration hub and providing time bound mechanisms for resolving disputes will certainly be a feather in the cap. Introducing Section 29A by way of amendment is therefore intentioned to ensure that the disputes in arbitration are adjudicated in a time-bound manner.
Even if the Arbitrator is successful in justifying his reasons for deciding a rate of interest, the Agreement between the parties being the birth-giver, should be held at a higher stature when it concerns an issue that has been pre-decided and mutually agreed upon by the parties.
While deliberating over several appeals, the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court decided the questions of liability and ‘pay and recover’ in favour of the appellant Insurance Company
“Apart from the remission ordered, there is no basis on which a party in CKH’s position or the Tribunal itself can seek to re-open or expand the subject matter of the award or arbitration.”
Gujarat High Court: The instant petitions came up before the Court challenging the Award of the Labour Court, Vadodara, whereby which it
Calcutta High Court: Shekhar B. Saraf, J. upheld the award granted by the Arbitral Tribunal holding that the award holder
By Siddharth Batra† and Chinmay Dubey††
Cite as: 2022 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 48
Supreme Court: The bench of MR Shah* and BV Nagarathna, JJ has held that in a case where on the date of
Delhi High Court: While reiterating the law on award of liquidated damages, Vibhu Bakhru, J., expressed that, where a contract comprises, several
Calcutta High Court: Ravi Krishan Kapur, J. dismissed an application which was filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
Karnataka High Court: A Division bench of Ritu Raj Awasthi, CJ., and Suraj Govindaraj, J. issued notice to the respondent and listed
Supreme Court: While deciding an almost three decade long commercial dispute relating to Arakonam Naval Air Station, the 3-Judge Bench comprising of
by Tariq Khan†
Cite as: 2022 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 8
Madhya Pradesh High Court: The Division Bench of Sheel Nagu and Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, JJ., while holding that M.P Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam,
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of M. R. Shah* and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ., held that where the Arbitrator appointed by the High
Supreme Court: In a case where the Punjab and Haryana High Court not only set aside the judgment of the District Judge
by Ramkishore Karanam*and Mahasweta M.**