{"id":211416,"date":"2019-03-06T12:00:51","date_gmt":"2019-03-06T06:30:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=211416"},"modified":"2019-03-08T12:08:40","modified_gmt":"2019-03-08T06:38:40","slug":"madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/","title":{"rendered":"Madras HC | Court cannot suo motu return a suit at threshold on the ground that parties had agreed to refer all disputes to arbitration"},"content":{"rendered":"

Madras High Court:\u00a0<\/strong>P.T. Asha, J., held that Section 8 of the Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1996 clearly indicate that the role of judicial authority to refer parties to arbitration arises only upon an application being made by a party to the arbitration agreement.<\/p>\n

The High Court was faced with a very interesting question:\u00a0\u201cWhether the Civil Court can act at the threshold in returning\/rejecting a Plaint without numbering the suit on the ground that the parties have entered into an Agreement to refer the disputes to arbitration?\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n

In the present case, there existed a Lease Agreement between the parties. As per Clause 19 of the Agreement, all disputed arising between the parties were to be resolved under the A&C Act. Subsequently, a dispute arose between the parties. The petitioner filed a suit before the District Munsif who returned the suit at the very threshold, observing on the basis of Clause 19 that\u00a0“this Court does not have jurisdiction to entertain this suit. Hence, this plaint is returned.”\u00a0<\/strong>Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner approached the High Court.<\/p>\n

The High Court referred to Section 9 CPC (courts to try all suits unless barred)\u00a0<\/em>and observed Civil Court have\u00a0to try all suits of civil nature except those suits which have been specifically barred under provisions of some Acts or impliedly barred. Therefore, the Court perused Section 8 of the A&C Act (power to refer parties to arbitration where there is an arbitration agreement).\u00a0<\/em>Relying on the decision in\u00a0P. Anand Gajapathi Raju v. P.V.G. Raju, <\/em>2000 (4) SCC 539<\/a> and\u00a0Ameet Lalchand Shah v. Rishabh Enterprises, <\/em>2018 SCC OnLine SC 487<\/a>, the Court observed,\u00a0“a reading of Section 8 would clearly indicate that the role of the Judicial authority to refer parties to arbitration will arise only upon an application being made by a party to the arbitration agreement or a person claiming under or through him. This window is given only to enable the defendant who is not desirous of having the dispute settled by arbitration to waive his right for having the dispute referred to arbitration. Therefore, from a reading of the above, it is very clear that a Judicial authority cannot suo moto return\/reject a suit on the ground that the parties to the suit have agreed to refer all their disputes to arbitration at the threshold when the case is filed.”\u00a0<\/strong>It was further observed that under the A&C Act, there is no total ouster of jurisdiction of Civil Courts unlike in cases arising under the SARFAESI Act, Motor Vehicles Act, etc. Resultantly, the petition was disposed of by directing the District Munsif to number the suit forthwith on the petitioner resubmitting the returned papers along with the copy of orders. [Convinio Shopping Nine 2 Nine v. Olympia Opaline Owners Assn., 2019 SCC OnLine Mad 646<\/b><\/a>, Order dated 04-03-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Madras High Court:\u00a0P.T. Asha, J., held that Section 8 of the Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1996 clearly indicate that the role of judicial <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[3226,34147,11421,34146,22284,21264],"class_list":["post-211416","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-arbitration","tag-judicial-authority","tag-sarfaesi-act","tag-section-8-of-arbitration-conciliation-act-1996","tag-section-9-cpc","tag-suo-motu"],"yoast_head":"\nMadras HC | Court cannot suo motu return a suit at threshold on the ground that parties had agreed to refer all disputes to arbitration | 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\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Madras HC | Court cannot suo motu return a suit at threshold on the ground that parties had agreed to refer all disputes to arbitration\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Madras High Court:\u00a0P.T. Asha, J., held that Section 8 of the Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1996 clearly indicate that the role of judicial\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/\" \/>\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=\"2019-03-06T06:30:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-08T06:38:40+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/madras-high-court1.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=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 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\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/\",\"name\":\"Madras HC | Court cannot suo motu return a suit at threshold on the ground that parties had agreed to refer all disputes to arbitration | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2019-03-06T06:30:51+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-08T06:38:40+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Madras HC | Court cannot suo motu return a suit at threshold on the ground that parties had agreed to refer all disputes to arbitration\"}]},{\"@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\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Madras HC | Court cannot suo motu return a suit at threshold on the ground that parties had agreed to refer all disputes to arbitration | 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\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Madras HC | Court cannot suo motu return a suit at threshold on the ground that parties had agreed to refer all disputes to arbitration","og_description":"Madras High Court:\u00a0P.T. Asha, J., held that Section 8 of the Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1996 clearly indicate that the role of judicial","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-03-06T06:30:51+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-08T06:38:40+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/11\/madras-high-court1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/","name":"Madras HC | Court cannot suo motu return a suit at threshold on the ground that parties had agreed to refer all disputes to arbitration | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2019-03-06T06:30:51+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-08T06:38:40+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/03\/06\/madras-hc-court-cannot-suo-motu-return-a-suit-at-threshold-on-the-ground-that-parties-had-agreed-to-refer-all-disputes-to-arbitration\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Madras HC | Court cannot suo motu return a suit at threshold on the ground that parties had agreed to refer all disputes to arbitration"}]},{"@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\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":263783,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/16\/explained-which-law-to-prevail-if-provisions-of-bihar-public-works-contracts-disputes-arbitration-tribunal-act-2008-are-in-conflict-with-the-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996\/","url_meta":{"origin":211416,"position":0},"title":"Explained| Which law to prevail if provisions of Bihar Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008 are in conflict with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?\u00a0","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"March 16, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In a case where the bench of Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ was deciding an issue relating to Bihar Public Works Contracts Disputes, the bench has held that if any of the provisions of the Bihar Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration Tribunal Act, 2008 are in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","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\/2022\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-109.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-109.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-109.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-109.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-109.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":245281,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/10\/sc-calls-for-amendment-to-sections-117-37-of-the-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996-to-bring-sections-8-11-at-par-on-appealability-read-how-vidya-drolia-judgment-has-led-to-an-anomaly\/","url_meta":{"origin":211416,"position":1},"title":"SC calls for amendment to Sections 11(7) & 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to bring Sections 8 & 11 at par on appealability. Read how Vidya Drolia judgment has led to an anomaly","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"March 10, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: In the light of the \u201cprima facie\u201d test laid down last year in Vidya Drolia v. Durga Trading Corporation,\u00a0(2021) 2 SCC 1, the 3-judge bench of RF Nariman*, BR Gavai and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ has held that the Parliament may need to have a re-look at Section 11(7)\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","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\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":246076,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/25\/arbitration-3\/","url_meta":{"origin":211416,"position":2},"title":"Is passing of \u201creasoned order\u201d a requisite while refusing to refer a matter to arbitration?","author":"Editor","date":"March 25, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Baglekar Akash Kumar\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","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\/2021\/03\/Arbitration-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Arbitration-1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Arbitration-1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Arbitration-1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/03\/Arbitration-1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":273401,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/10\/arbitration-agreement-language-final-binding-arbitral-award-intention-valid-supreme-court-legal-research-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":211416,"position":3},"title":"Arbitration clause, even without the words \u201cfinal and binding\u201d, valid if the intention of the parties, to abide by arbitrator’s decision, is clear: Supreme Court","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"September 10, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"When Section 7 or any other provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 do not stipulate any particular form or requirements, it would not be appropriate for a court to gratuitously add impediments and desist from upholding the validity of an arbitration agreement.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","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\/2022\/09\/Arbitration-clause-even-without-the-words-final-and-binding-valid-if-the-intention-of-the-parties-to-abide-by-arbitrators-decision-is-clear-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Arbitration-clause-even-without-the-words-final-and-binding-valid-if-the-intention-of-the-parties-to-abide-by-arbitrators-decision-is-clear-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Arbitration-clause-even-without-the-words-final-and-binding-valid-if-the-intention-of-the-parties-to-abide-by-arbitrators-decision-is-clear-1.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Arbitration-clause-even-without-the-words-final-and-binding-valid-if-the-intention-of-the-parties-to-abide-by-arbitrators-decision-is-clear-1.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/09\/Arbitration-clause-even-without-the-words-final-and-binding-valid-if-the-intention-of-the-parties-to-abide-by-arbitrators-decision-is-clear-1.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":298424,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/03\/mere-use-of-word-arbitration-or-arbitrator-not-enough-to-construe-an-arbitration-agreement-delhi-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":211416,"position":4},"title":"Mere use of word \u2018arbitration\u2019 or \u2018arbitrator\u2019 not enough to construe an agreement to be an arbitration agreement: Delhi High Court","author":"Editor","date":"August 3, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cIt is palpably clear that the language of the purported arbitration clause must evidence an unambiguous, explicit and unequivocal intention to refer the disputes to arbitration, leaving no room for doubt that parties chose arbitration as their only mode of resolution of disputes.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"delhi high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":272263,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/08\/26\/calcutta-high-court-conduct-of-parties-not-a-substitute-for-an-arbitration-agreement\/","url_meta":{"origin":211416,"position":5},"title":"Calcutta High Court | Conduct of Parties – not a substitute for an arbitration agreement","author":"Editor","date":"August 26, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Calcutta High Court: While deciding a review petition, Debangsu Basak, J. held that the court while exercising powers under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 cannot substitute arbitration agreement with conduct of parties. Facts of the Case The respondent filed an application under Section 11\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Calcutta High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/calcutta_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211416","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\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=211416"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/211416\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=211416"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=211416"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=211416"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}