{"id":195850,"date":"2018-05-07T14:32:37","date_gmt":"2018-05-07T09:02:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=195850"},"modified":"2018-05-10T16:35:16","modified_gmt":"2018-05-10T11:05:16","slug":"2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/","title":{"rendered":"2018 SCC Vol. 4 May 7, 2018 Part 2"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 S. 7(5) r\/w S. 11 \u2014 Intention to incorporate arbitration clause from another agreement \u2014 When cannot be inferred:<\/strong> In this case agreement between appellant and respondent did not contain any arbitration clause, however, Cl. 2 of agreement provided that conditions relating to works and quality specified in agreement between Construction Contractor and employer would be binding on subcontractor\/appellant and cl. 9.10 provided that terms and conditions of agreement between Contractor and employer will be applicable for items not mentioned in agreement clauses. Hence, following the ruling in M.R. Engineers and Contractors (P) Ltd.,<a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/54MnBhX3\"> (2009) 7 SCC 696<\/a>, wherein it was inter alia, held, that where a contract between the parties provides that execution or performance of that contract shall be in terms of another contract (which contains terms and conditions relating to performance and a provision for settlement of disputes by arbitration), then, terms of referred contract in regard to execution\/performance alone will apply, and not arbitration agreement in referred contract, unless there is special reference to arbitration clause also, held, that arbitration clause was not intended to be made as a part of contract between appellant and respondent. Thus, appellant\u2019s petition under S. 11 rightly dismissed by High Court. [Elite Engg. and Construction (Hyd.) (P) Ltd. v. Techtrans Construction India (P) Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/X4QCKEg2\">(2018) 4 SCC 281<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Civil Procedure Code, 1908 \u2014 Or. 43 R. 1(r) and Or. 39 R. 1 \u2014 Interference in interim order\/Interlocutory Orders\/Injunction\/Stay:<\/strong> When main appeal itself is pending for consideration before High Court and order being interim in nature, interference with interim order must be declined. Expeditious disposal of first appeal on merits, emphasized. [B. Muthukrishnan v. S.T. Reddiar Educational &amp; Charitable Trust, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/NBNqZq4h\">(2018) 4 SCC 298<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Competition Act, 2002 \u2014 Ss. 4(2)(c) Expln. (a), 2(b), (f)(ii) &amp; (m):<\/strong> Abuse of dominant position by cable operators\u2019 group by unlawful premature termination of agreement with broadcaster of a TV channel resulting in denial to broadcaster of market access, is violative of S. 4(2)(c). Words \u201cin any manner\u201d in S. 4(2)(c) are of wide import and should be given natural meaning. Once dominant position of the group made out on facts, question whether broadcaster is in competition with the group irrelevant for purpose of application of S. 4(2)(c). [CCI v. Fast Way Transmission (P) Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/3VZ1LI8m\">(2018) 4 SCC 316<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 \u2014 S. 439 \u2014 Bail:<\/strong> Grant of bail by High Court, in a case of murder, being on a very little reference to\/or discussion on merits of bail applications. Reason for release mainly one, which reason can, on a fair reading, be understood or misunderstood almost as a mitigating circumstance or a kind of a justification for murder. High Court\u2019s order(s) set aside and bail applications restored to file of High Court, for hearing matter(s) afresh, after giving liberty to parties to file additional affidavits. [Mubin Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/Sp5r327S\">(2018) 4 SCC 312<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Family and Personal Laws \u2014 Guardians and Wards \u2014 Custody of Child\/Minor \u2014 Jurisdiction\/Judicial Interference\/Parens Patriae Jurisdiction\/Conflict of Laws\/Private International Law:<\/strong> Principle of comity of courts or forum conveniens cannot alone determine threshold bar of jurisdiction. In these matters, paramount consideration is always best interest of child. This cannot be subject-matter of final determination in proceedings under Or. 7 R. 11 CPC. [Jasmeet Kaur v. Navtej Singh, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/ADTqqHMX\">(2018) 4 SCC 295<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 \u2014 Ss. 8(2), (3), 10-B and 11 \u2014 Mining leases declared to be illegal in Goa Foundation, (2014) 6 SCC 590 \u2014 Grant of second renewal \u2014 Impermissibility of:<\/strong> State of Goa should have granted fresh mining leases instead of granting a second renewal. Such second renewal, held, illegal in view of Goa Foundation, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/NSsphs73\">(2014) 6 SCC 590<\/a>. Second renewal of mining leases set aside and consequential directions also issued. [Goa Foundation v. Sesa Sterlite Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/932r4K6i\">(2018) 4 SCC 218<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Penal Code, 1860 \u2014 Ss. 467, 468 and 471 r\/w S. 120-B \u2014 Bail \u2014 Grant of \u2014 Reasons for:<\/strong> Appellant-accused was facing trial under Ss. 467, 468 and 471 r\/w S. 120-B IPC. His period of custody was more than one year. High Court rejected his bail application mainly on basis of FSL Report. Though case is pending for a long time, trial has not yet commenced. Evidently, co-accused was granted bail. In aforesaid circumstances, held, it is just and proper to release appellant on bail. Hence, appellant directed to be released on bail on certain conditions. [Vijay Kumar v. State of Rajasthan, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/Vhg4Vs42\">(2018) 4 SCC 315<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Public Accountability, Vigilance and Prevention of Corruption \u2014 Government Contracts and Tenders \u2014 Purchase of helicopters by State Governments \u2014 Unsubstantiated and baseless allegations:<\/strong> In this case involving purchase of Agusta Westland helicopter by the State of Chhattisgarh, where allegations of kickbacks and deposit in foreign accounts, specific allegation of deposit in account of Chief Minister\u2019s son were imposed. Prayer for direction for investigation into allegations, was rejected as there was nothing on record to show that said purchases could have been made at a lesser price. CAG did not attribute any extraneous consideration in deal concerned. It was clarified that Government was entitled to make choice in purchase of helicopters which were purchased after evaluation of global tenders. Son of the Chief Minister was not personally a party. Disclosure in Panama Papers is a matter which is still under investigation. Hence, petition filed by Swaraj Abhiyan seeking probe into the alleged anomalies in the purchase of Agusta Westland helicopter by the State of Chhattisgarh, dismissed. [Swaraj Abhiyan v. Union of India, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/9dbEhMH3\">(2018) 4 SCC 300<\/a>]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 S. 7(5) r\/w S. 11 \u2014 Intention to incorporate arbitration clause from another agreement \u2014 When <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":91,"featured_media":182154,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,16],"tags":[4751,13041,11411],"class_list":["post-195850","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-supremecourtcases","tag-scc","tag-cases-reported-in-scc","tag-supreme-court-cases"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>2018 SCC Vol. 4 May 7, 2018 Part 2 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"2018 SCC Vol. 4 May 7, 2018 Part 2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 S. 7(5) r\/w S. 11 \u2014 Intention to incorporate arbitration clause from another agreement \u2014 When\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-05-07T09:02:37+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-05-10T11:05:16+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/\",\"name\":\"2018 SCC Vol. 4 May 7, 2018 Part 2 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-05-07T09:02:37+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-05-10T11:05:16+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"2018 SCC Vol. 4 May 7, 2018 Part 2\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\",\"name\":\"Saba\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Saba\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"2018 SCC Vol. 4 May 7, 2018 Part 2 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"2018 SCC Vol. 4 May 7, 2018 Part 2","og_description":"Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 S. 7(5) r\/w S. 11 \u2014 Intention to incorporate arbitration clause from another agreement \u2014 When","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-05-07T09:02:37+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-05-10T11:05:16+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Saba","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Saba","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/","name":"2018 SCC Vol. 4 May 7, 2018 Part 2 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg","datePublished":"2018-05-07T09:02:37+00:00","dateModified":"2018-05-10T11:05:16+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/05\/07\/2018-scc-vol-4-may-7-2018-part-2\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"2018 SCC Vol. 4 May 7, 2018 Part 2"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785","name":"Saba","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Saba"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":203947,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/18\/arbitration-clause-non-assignable-held-does-not-devolve-on-company-being-separate-entity-from-proprietorship-firm-delhi-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":195850,"position":0},"title":"Arbitration clause non-assignable; held, does not devolve on company being separate entity from proprietorship firm: Delhi HC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 18, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Pratibha M. Singh, J. allowed an appeal filed by the Government of NCT of Delhi which challenged the award passed by a sole arbitrator. The brief facts were that the Government called a tender for providing sanitation and scavenger services inside\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":200373,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/20\/arbitration-clause-held-to-survive-even-when-leave-and-licence-agreement-was-mutually-terminated\/","url_meta":{"origin":195850,"position":1},"title":"Arbitration Clause held to survive even when Leave and Licence Agreement was mutually terminated","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 20, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Mridula Bhatkar, J. directed the trial court to refer the matter before it to the Arbitrator holding that it had no jurisdiction to try the suit. The respondent \u2013 original plaintiff \u2013 had filed a suit based on an agreement entered\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":231674,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/02\/pre-2015-arbitration-amendment-act-dispute-in-a-post-2015-era\/","url_meta":{"origin":195850,"position":2},"title":"Pre- 2015 Arbitration Amendment Act dispute in a post 2015 era","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 2, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"by Alisha Mehta* and Achintya Sharma**","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Op Eds&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/Arbitration.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/Arbitration.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/Arbitration.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/Arbitration.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/11\/Arbitration.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":237200,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/10\/10\/levy-of-liquidated-damages-by-one-party-to-a-contract-when-arbitrable-comments-in-light-of-sc-judgment-of-mitra-guha-v-ongc\/","url_meta":{"origin":195850,"position":3},"title":"Levy of Liquidated Damages by one party to a contract: When arbitrable? Comments in light of SC Judgment of Mitra Guha v. ONGC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 10, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"by Prashant Pakhiddey* & Lakshmi Dwivedi**","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Op Eds&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/10\/for-5.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/10\/for-5.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/10\/for-5.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/10\/for-5.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/10\/for-5.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":299153,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/14\/2023-scc-vol-7-part-1\/","url_meta":{"origin":195850,"position":4},"title":"2023 SCC Vol. 7 Part 1","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 14, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 Ss. 8, 11 and 7: Non-payment or deficient payment of stamp duty on substantive contract comprising\/containing arbitration clause, or on standalone arbitration agreement, in cases where payment of stamp duty is mandatory, renders such arbitration agreement as non-existent pending payment of (the balance) stamp\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Cases Reported&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"2023 scc vol. 7 part 1","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/2023-scc-vol.-7-part-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/2023-scc-vol.-7-part-1.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/2023-scc-vol.-7-part-1.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/2023-scc-vol.-7-part-1.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":268089,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/08\/2022-scc-vol-4-part-3\/","url_meta":{"origin":195850,"position":5},"title":"2022 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 8, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"2022 SCC Volume 4 Part 3, consists a very pertinent decision of the Supreme Court wherein it was held \u00a0that it cannot be said that the Tribunal will have jurisdiction only if the subject property is disputed to be a waqf property and not if it is admitted to be\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Cases Reported&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"SCC Part","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/195850","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/91"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=195850"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/195850\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/182154"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=195850"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=195850"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=195850"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}