Conundrum between Arbitration Act and MSME Act – An Analysis
by Swarnendu Chatterjee† and Dhriti Bole††
Cite as: 2022 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 58
by Swarnendu Chatterjee† and Dhriti Bole††
Cite as: 2022 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 58
Bombay High Court: A very interesting question was considered by G.S. Kulkarni, J., the question being, whether mere filing of a proceeding
Delhi High Court: Mukta Gupta, J., expressed that the issue of whether in the absence of a third party, the refundable security
Delhi High Court: Mukta Gupta, J., decided that mere use of word ‘Arbitration’ in the heading of an Agreement would not mean
Supreme Court: In a case where the bench of Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ was deciding an issue relating to
Karnataka High Court: SR Krishna Kumar, J., disposed of the petition and directed the petitioner-company to avail such remedies as available in
Allahabad High Court: Noting the significance of Sections 14 and 15 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Jayant Banerji, J., expressed
Delhi High Court: Sanjeev Narula, J., allowed an arbitration petition by appointing a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the contesting parties.
Delhi High Court: Amit Bansal, J., dismissed a petition challenging the order passed by the lower court whereby respondent’s application under Section
by Swarnendu Chatterjee*and Sneha Rath**
Delhi High Court: While observing that the role of ICADR Rules shall come into play with regard to the procedure to be
Supreme Court: Expressing on the aspect of independence and impartiality of the arbitrators, Division Bench of M.R. Shah and Aniruddha Bose, JJ.,
Delhi High Court: C. Hari Shankar, J. observed that, The question of whether, once a bench of the Supreme Court has doubted
Supreme Court: A Division Bench comprising of R.F. Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ. held that a foreign arbitral award is enforceable against
Delhi High Court: Suresh Kumar Kait, J., reiterated that no party could be permitted to unilaterally appoint an Arbitrator, as the same
Supreme Court: The bench of Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy*, JJ has held that the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development
Delhi High Court: Jayant Nath, J., observed that the assignment of the trademark is by a contract and not by a statutory
Delhi High Court: J.R. Midha, J., in view of serious doubts on the independence of sole arbitrator as named in the arbitration
by Arush Agarwal† and Bhavya Gupta††