2023 SCC Vol. 2 Part 1
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — S. 11 — Res judicata — Applicability: Findings on issue(s) which actually fell for consideration in the
civil procedure code
2023 SCC Vol. 1 Part 4
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 20 and 42 r/w S. 2(1)(e) — Jurisdictional seat of arbitration once fixed under S.
Kerala High Court | Court fee cannot be refunded after the suit decided on merits
Kerala High Court observed that when the suit is dismissed on finding that it is barred by law, the court fees cannot be refunded.
2022 SCC Vol. 10 Part 4
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Or. 12 R. 6 — Grant of relief on the basis of admission — When
2022 SCC Vol. 10 Part 3
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Or. 22 Rr. 3 and 4 — Abatement of appeal: Appeal as a whole cannot
Delhi High Court | When a prayer to appoint an Arbitrator has been heard and rejected, the same relief cannot be sought by filing a review petition
Mere expression “place of arbitration” cannot be the basis to determine the intention of the parties that they have intended that place as the “Seat of Arbitration”
2022 SCC Vol. 10 Part 1
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 — S. 12-A — Rejection of plaint for non-compliance with S. 12-A i.e. in cases where
The Wide Scope of Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
by Ayushi Raghuwanshi†
Supreme Court| ‘Exclusion clause’ destroying the contract entered with knowledge, cannot be permitted to be used by a party who introduced it, to avoid liability
Supreme Court: In an appeal against the decision of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (‘NCDRC’), wherein the commission having
Preliminary Inquiry under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
by Ayushi Raghuwanshi*
2022 SCC Vol. 9 Part 2
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — S. 31(7) and Ss. 17, 21, 23(3), 24(1), 25, 26, 29 and 85(2)(a) —
2022 SCC Vol. 8 Part 5
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Or. 23 R. 3 — Consent order: All the parties to the consent terms are
Limitation can be a preliminary issue under Or. 14, R. 2(2)(b) CPC if the question can be decided on admitted facts: Supreme Court
Supreme Court: Principal question before the Division Bench of Ajay Rastogi and C.T. Ravikumar*, JJ., for contemplation was whether the
Delhi High Court| Negligence of counsel not a reasonable ground within Order XI Rule 1(5) CPC; Facts of the case must disclose ‘urgency’ to avail benefit under Or. XI R. 1(4) CPC
Delhi High Court: In a case filed by the petitioner challenging dismissal order in relation to an application filed seeking
Court’s power under Section 9 A&C Act, 1996 wider than CPC; Technicalities of CPC cannot prevent it from securing the ends of justice: SC
Supreme Court: The Division Bench of Indira Banerjee* and A.S. Bopanna, JJ., contemplated the scope of Section 9 of Arbitration
2022 SCC Vol. 8 Part 3
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Or. 7 R. 11(d) and Or. 14 R. 2: Limitation as a ground for rejecting
2022 SCC Vol. 8 Part 2
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — S. 96, Or. 41 Rr. 31 and 33: Principles summarised regarding powers and duty of
2022 SCC Vol. 8 Part 1
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 8, 11, 7, 2(1)(h), 16 and 45 — Non-signatory or non-party to arbitration
Explained| Can an independent counter claim under Order VIII Rule 6A CPC having nothing to do with the plaintiffs be allowed?
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of UU Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Sudhanshu Dhulia*, JJ has held that a counter claim under