Beyond the Signature: Supreme Court Redefines Party Status in Arbitration Proceedings using the Group of Companies Doctrine
by Vasanth Rajasekaran† and Harshvardhan Korada††
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 85
arbitration proceedings
Can Resolution Professional keep claims in abeyance during pendency of Corporate Debtor’s counter claim before arbitrator? NCLAT Answers
While dismissing the present appeal, the NCLAT held that appellant’s prayer pertaining to admission of the claim cannot be acceded to in the ‘eye of Law’.
“Time to change old perception and lead IIAC arbitration process to new heights”: Justice Hemant Gupta at Indian Arbitration Leadership Roundtable
The Indian Arbitration Leadership Roundtable organized by the India International Arbitration Centre (IIAC) witnessed in-depth discussion over various important facets of Institutional Arbitration.
Court cannot interfere with the enforcement of a bank guarantee except cases where fraud or special equity is prima facie made out so as to prevent irretrievable injustice: Delhi High Court
A Single Judge Bench of Chandra Dhari Singh, J. disposed of the petition and restrained from invoking/encashing the bank guarantee.
Change of venue does not result in change of the seat of arbitration; holding otherwise would create a recipe for litigation: Supreme Court
Supreme Court: The bench of Ajay Rastogi and Sanjiv Khanna*, JJ has held that subsequent hearings or proceedings at a different location
Explained: Does Limitation Act, 1963 apply to arbitration proceedings under Section 18(3) of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006
Supreme Court: The bench of Ashok Bhushan and R. Subhash Reddy*, JJ has held that the Limitation Act, 1963 is applicable to
Applicability of the Law of Limitation to Arbitration Proceedings
by Gunjan Chhabra†
Ker HC | No bar to simultaneous continuance of a criminal proceeding and a civil proceeding, if the two arise from separate causes of action
Kerala High Court: R. Narayana Pisharadi, J. dismissed a petition praying for quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner initiated under Section
Bom HC | Not unlawful for an Advocate to enter into a “contingent contract” while appearing in capacity of a “counsel” in arbitration proceedings
Bombay High Court: A.S. Chandurkar, J., clarified that a contract whereby an advocate asks for the fee based on the outcome of
Arbitrator is not under an obligation to frame issues before adjudication; may do so for the sake of crystallizing the dispute
Jammu & Kashmir High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Sindhu Sharma, Dhiraj Singh Thakur, JJ., allowed an LPA filed against the
Petition under Article 226 or 227 challenging interlocutory order passed in arbitration proceedings not to be entertained
Bombay High Court: A Division Bench comprising of B.R. Gavai and M.S. Karnik, JJ. dismissed a petition filed against the order of
Antrix-Devas Dispute: HC allows Bangalore City Civil Court to decide upon jurisdiction in the matter
Delhi High Court: The Division Bench comprising S. Ravindra Bhat and Yogesh Khanna, JJ. set aside the decision of the Single Bench