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.
Limitation Period
Under Section 11(6) A&C Act, Referral Court must limit its enquiry to the question of limitation period only: SC
Referral courts, at the stage of deciding an application for appointment of arbitrator, must not conduct an intricate evidentiary enquiry into the question whether the claims raised by the applicant are time barred.”
Limitation period for adverse possession commences when possession becomes adverse, not upon plaintiff’s acquisition of ownership: Supreme Court reaffirms
“The evidence on the part of the appellants would reveal that instead of establishing ‘animus possidendi’ under hostile colour of title, they have tendered evidence indicating only permissive possession and at the same time failed to establish the time from which it was converted to adverse to the title of the respondent which is open and continuous for the prescriptive period.”
‘S 149(1) neither effaces nor removes the first proviso to S153C (1)’; Delhi High Court quashes notice u/S 148 of IT Act
In cases where a search is conducted after 31-03-2021, the first proviso to Section 153C (1) would have to be construed and tested as regards the date when the Assessing Officer decides to initiate action against the non-searched entity.
Limitation period for Government Applications governed by Art. 114(a) of Limitation Act, not Section 378 CrPC; Sikkim HC clarifies
The Court was of the view that both, the applicant in viewing the requirement of filing the appeal within six months as per S. 378(5) CrPC; and the respondents contending that the appeal should have been filed within sixty days as per S. 378(5), were equally incorrect.
Never Reported Judgment| Cause of action for suit filed by reversioner for possession of immovable property arises on the death of a Hindu widow [(1953) 1 SCC 407]
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1953 on limitation period of suit on possession of immovable property.
SC dismisses Centre’s plea to condone delay of 12 years and 158 days for filing restoration of suit; calls it a ‘mockery of justice’
“The length of the delay is a relevant matter which the court must take into consideration while considering whether the delay should be condoned or not.”
‘3 years is a long period for filing application for appointing arbitrator’; SC suggests Parliament to bring amendment prescribing specific limitation period
Supreme Court, while allowing the present petition, appointed Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Former Judge of the Supreme Court of India, to act as the sole arbitrator.
Limitation for appeal against acquittal can be condoned: Supreme Court
Supreme Court acknowledged that in case of special law prescribing a limitation period, Section 5 of the Limitation Act would have no application.
‘Limitation period for arbitration to be decided by Arbitral Tribunal while passing order u/s 20 of A&C Act’; Telangana HC appoints nominee arbitrator u/s 11(6)
“It is a well-settled law that while deciding the question of appointment of arbitrator, the Court shall not touch the merits of the case as it may cause prejudice to the case of the parties.”
COVID-19 Limitation Period Suspension included outer limit of period to condone delay: Supreme Court
The appellants mainly averred that the further period of 90 days had not expired on the date of imposition of lockdown as on 23-03-2020.
Limitation period to appeal against Family Court’s decree is thirty days, delay can be condoned if sufficient cause is shown: Delhi High Court clarifies
“Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 operate in different spheres and apply to orders passed by different forums i.e., District Court and the Family Court respectively.”
Delhi High Court set aside delayed show cause notice issued by Revenue Department under IT Act
The Delhi High Court observed that there was an unexplained substantial delay in issuing the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 09-11-2017 and thus, is inexcusable in the eyes of law
Section 11B Central Excise Act’s limitation period applicable to claims for rebate of duty under Rule 18 of the Central Excise Rules, 2002: SC
Supreme Court observed that if it is accepted that the period of limitation prescribed under Section 11B of the Act shall not be applicable with respect to claim for rebate of duty as there is no mention of Section 11B of the Act either in Rule 18 or in the notification dated 6.9.2004, then there will not be any period of limitation for making an application for rebate of duty.
Delhi High Court | Arbitration cannot be invoked even by consent of the parties once the claim is found to be time-barred
Delhi High Court: In a case filed by Extramarks Education India Private Limited (petitioner) seeking appointment of an arbitrator to
Consumer Forum | Can complainant raise consumer dispute where excess electricity duty is charged? Is he overriding statutory remedy if he already approached the Collector? Read on
Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Gujarat State, Ahmedabad: Justice V.P. Patel, President and U.P. Jani, Member, addressed an appeal which was raised in
[Name-Logo Dispute] Telangana HC | ‘GSK’ being widely known mark: GSK Life Sciences (P) Ltd. ordered to suitably delete word ‘GSK’; No violation of S. 35, TM Act found
Telangana High Court: Abhinand Kumar Shavili, J., addressed a matter wherein the name and logo of a company were in dispute. Instant
NCLAT| Issuance of the cheque is indicative of acknowledgement of debt, even if returned dishonored
National Company Law Appellate Tribunal- A Coram of Anant Bijay Singh, J. (Judicial Member) and Shreesha Merla (Technical Member) dismissed an appeal
Del HC | How the limitation period for filing S. 138 NI Act complaints is to be calculated? What is the effect of not filing S. 142(1)(b) proviso application? Explained
Delhi High Court: Suresh Kumar Kait, J., reversed the order of the lower court issuing summons against the accused in a case
Cal HC | Can a transferee claim that he being the transferee of an establishment is not liable to pay dues accruing before the transfer under ESI Act? HC explains
Calcutta High Court: Ravi Krishan Kapur, J., while addressing an issue pertaining to Employees’ State Insurance Act, 1948, observed that, The ESI Act