Judiciary’s Robe of Activism in ADR Matters
by Soumyaa Sharma†
Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996
Himachal Pradesh High Court | Lack of immediate remedy under Arbitration Act not a ground to challenge an arbitral order passed on miscellaneous application before High Court
Himachal Pradesh High Court: In the case where it was argued before the Court that the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for
Ori HC | It is only when a purchase order is placed that a ‘contract’ would be entered into and only then arbitration clause would become part thereof
Orissa High Court: S. Muralidhar, CJ. dismissed the petition, declined the appointment of arbitrator and left it open to the petitioners to
Does Arbitral Tribunal have exclusive jurisdiction to settle disputes relating to “works contract” in State of Madhya Pradesh under the scheme of M.P Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983? MP HC explains
Madhya Pradesh High Court: The Division Bench of Sheel Nagu and Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, JJ., while holding that M.P Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam,
Limitation for challenging arbitral award can only commence from date of receipt of signed copy and not from the receipt of draft: Supreme Court
Supreme Court: The bench of Indu Malhotra* and Ajay Rastogi, JJ was posed with the question as to whether the period of
The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Should the High Courts exercise the powers of superintendence over arbitral tribunals?
by Abhinav Shrivastava* and Nirmal Prasad**