
Arbitration Law Roundup: A quick recap of the top arbitration cases from November 2024
Top arbitration cases on unilateral appointment, seat of arbitration, limitation period, scope of judicial scrutiny and more.
Top arbitration cases on unilateral appointment, seat of arbitration, limitation period, scope of judicial scrutiny and more.
The Court had ordered the attachment of the Bikaner House to enforce payment since neither did the Nagar Palika of the State of Rajasthan comply with the court order to file an affidavit of assets nor did it pay the petitioner per the arbitral award.
The Nagar Palika of the State of Rajasthan failed to comply with court order to file an affidavit of assets despite being given multiple opportunities and failed to pay the petitioner in accordance with the arbitral award.
by Ameya Gokhale* and Renjith Nair**
by Vasanth Rajasekaran* and Harshvardhan Korada**
“We have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of either party including regarding the arbitrability of the dispute. All contentions and pleas are kept open for the parties to raise before the arbitral tribunal.”
“While applying the principles of Order 23 Rule 1 of CPC to applications under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, it must be kept in mind that it will act as a bar to only those applications which are filed subsequent to the withdrawal of a previous Section 11(6) application filed on the basis of the same cause of action.”
The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 does not prohibit Public Sector Undertakings from empanelling potential arbitrators, however, an arbitration clause cannot mandate the other party to select its arbitrator from the panel curated by PSUs.
‘If the non-signatory’s actions align with the signatories, it could reasonably lead the signatories to believe that the non-signatory was a veritable party to the contract containing the arbitration clause.’
by Aparna Ramesh Devkar
by Vasanth Rajasekaran* and Harshvardhan Korada**
The Supreme Court elucidated the key factors through which the intention of the parties to be bound by an arbitration agreement can be gauged.
“Section 29A intends to ensure the timely completion of arbitral proceedings while allowing Courts the flexibility to grant extensions when warranted. Prescribing a limitation period, unless clearly stated in words or necessary, should not be accepted. Bar by limitation has penal and fatal consequences.”
by Prashant Pakhiddey* and Manav Gill**
An update on new additions of case laws to SCC’s High Court Cases volume.
“The legislative intent of inserting Section 29-A of the Act is only for expeditious disposal of the arbitration proceedings and not to confer a new defence upon an unsuccessful party to challenge the award and to reopen the entire proceedings.”
A quick recap of the latest rulings on Arbitration Law by the High Courts.