{"id":252783,"date":"2021-08-17T12:00:13","date_gmt":"2021-08-17T06:30:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=252783"},"modified":"2021-08-17T10:54:04","modified_gmt":"2021-08-17T05:24:04","slug":"2021-scc-vol-4-part-3","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/","title":{"rendered":"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3"},"content":{"rendered":"<blockquote>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3<\/span><\/h3>\n<\/blockquote>\n<hr \/>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 Pt. II and S. 20 \u2014 Law of arbitration\/curial law\/seat of arbitration \u2014 Determination of, by consent of parties:<\/strong> In this case, Cl. 67 of the contract between the parties inter alia provided that in the absence of an Arbitration Act in Bhutan, the Arbitral Tribunal shall follow\/be guided by the basic principles and procedures as contained in the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 while Cl. 67(vii)(a) provided that all arbitration shall be held at New Delhi, India\/Thimphu, Bhutan. On 25-2-2013, the Kingdom of Bhutan enacted the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act, 2013 while on 28-7-2020, the respondent Contractor sent a notice of arbitration to the appellant Authority under Cl. 67(ii) of the Contract, and nominated its arbitrator. Since the appellant Authority had failed to appoint its arbitrator, High Court exercised its jurisdiction under S. 11 of the Indian A&amp;C Act, 1996 and made the appointment and also directed that the two arbitrators would proceed to appoint the presiding arbitrator. Appellant Authority did not have an issue with respect to the panel of arbitrators appointed and their grievance was limited to the applicability of the Indian A&amp;C Act, 1996 and the seat of arbitration at New Delhi. In view of the consensus arrived at between the parties, the order of High Court was modified to the extent that all disputes arising out of the agreement dt. 14-4-2009 shall be conducted in accordance with the Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of Bhutan, 2013 with the seat of arbitration at Thimphu. [Punatsangchhu-1 Hydroelectric Project Authority v. Larsen &amp; Toubro Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/14CF93IQ\">(2021) 4 SCC 511<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 Ss. 8 and 11 \u2014 Arbitration clause\/agreement contained in substantive contract\/instrument on which stamp duty has to be compulsorily paid:<\/strong> Issues referred to larger Bench of five Judges that whether the arbitration clause can be enforced\/acted upon, when such substantive contract\/instrument is unstamped, whilst adjudication of the rights and obligations under the underlying substantive contract cannot proceed before the deficit stamp duty is paid in accordance with law; Authority which must impound the unstamped instrument at different stages, so that the deficit stamp duty may be paid in accordance with law and adjudication of the rights and obligations under the underlying substantive contract, by the arbitrator may commence thereafter. [N.N. Global Mercantile (P) Ltd. v. Indo Unique Flame Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/0YbF0C3M\">(2021) 4 SCC 379<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Constitution of India \u2014 Art. 226 \u2014 Exercise of power under \u2014 Reasoned and independent analysis \u2014 Necessity:<\/strong> Technology enables Judges to bring speed, efficiency and accuracy to judicial work but prolific use of \u201ccut-copy-paste\u201d function should not become substitute for substantive reasoning which, in ultimate analysis is defining feature of judicial process. The fact that Judges are indeed hard pressed for time, faced with burgeoning vacancies and large caseloads acknowledged and perhaps crisp reasoning could be answer to the issue. [UPSC v. Bibhu Prasad Sarangi, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/aN93RlBl\">(2021) 4 SCC 516<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Contempt of Court \u2014 Civil Contempt \u2014 Wilful disobedience\/contumacious conduct:<\/strong> Conduct lacking in bona fides alone, of successful resolution applicant under Insolvency Code is insufficiency to invite the penal consequences which emanate from the exercise of the contempt jurisdiction of the Court. [AMTEK Auto Ltd. Committee of Creditors v. Dinkar T. Venkatasubramanian, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/0T7w9F74\">(2021) 4 SCC 457<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Courts, Tribunals and Judiciary \u2014 Courts, Tribunals and Special Courts \u2014 Tribunals \u2014 Tenure of Members\/Chairperson \u2014 Competent authority \u2014 Scope of judicial interference:<\/strong> In this case, tenure of Chairperson of Tribunal directed\/specified by Government under the applicable statutory provisions which held the field at the relevant time, come to an end. Prayer for extension of tenure on ground that incumbent Chairman was the only judicial member of the Board and that there was no other judicial member, held not tenable in the light of principles laid down in Rojer Mathew, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/9xO8pv12\">(2020) 6 SCC 1<\/a> and Madras Bar Assn., (2021) 7 SCC 369. [International Assn. for Protection of Intellectual Property (India Group) v. Union of India, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/iK199DRU\">(2021) 4 SCC 519<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Government Grants, Largesse, Public Property and Public Premises \u2014 Affirmative Action Schemes, Pension and Other Schemes \u2014 Pension Schemes \u2014 Generally \u2014 Different pension schemes for freedom fighters: <\/strong>In this case, applicant had not produced required documents as per scheme concerned, hence he was held, not entitled to pension under that scheme though he might be getting Freedom Fighter&#8217;s Pension under some other scheme. [Union of India v. A. Alagam Perumal Kone, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/v8m0dsNK\">(2021) 4 SCC 535<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 \u2014 Ss. 7 &amp; 9 and S. 238 \u2014 Petition under S. 7 or S. 9 IBC \u2014 Maintainability of, even when there exists an admitted winding-up petition regarding the same company:<\/strong> IBC has overriding effect over winding-up provisions of the Companies Act, including S. 446 of the Companies Act, 1956\/S. 279 &amp; S. 434(1)(c) of the Companies Act, 2013. (1) Pendency of admitted winding-up proceedings, thus held, not a bar to S. 7 or S. 9 IBC petitions, as the latter are independent and overriding proceedings. (2) Transfer of such pending admitted winding-up petition to NCLT for adjudication under IBC, further held, is not the only route to IBC in such case, as S. 7 or S. 9 IBC petition are independent proceedings and IBC has overriding effect over winding-up provisions of the Companies Act. (3) Fresh petition under S. 7 or S. 9 IBC, or, transfer of pending admitted winding-up petition to NCLT under IBC, are subject only to: (i) test of irreversible\/irretrievable act(s)\/stage having been done or reached in the winding-up proceedings as laid down in Action Ispat, (2021) 2 SCC 641, or, (ii) where a company in winding up is near corporate death. These have to be determined in the facts and circumstances of each case, and an irresistible conclusion reached in this regard. (4) Irreversible\/irretrievable act(s)\/stage in the winding-up proceedings, clarified, must be act(s) or stage in or of the winding-up proceedings themselves. Sale of property of corporate creditor\/company which is under winding-up proceedings by secured creditor who stood outside the winding-up proceedings, held, is not irreversible\/irretrievable act\/stage in the winding-up proceedings themselves, hence, not a bar to fresh petition under S. 7 or S. 9 IBC. (5) Fresh S. 7 or S. 9 IBC petition being an independent proceeding having overriding effect over winding-up provisions of the Companies Act, and which has to be determined on its own merits, held, it is irrelevant that pendency of winding-up proceedings was suppressed in S. 7 or S. 9 IBC application, nor would such act be a subterfuge. [A. Navinchandra Steels (P) Ltd. v. Srei Equipment Finance Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/gS11U556\">(2021) 4 SCC 435<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 \u2014 Ss. 9 and 8 \u2014 Application under S. 9 by operational creditor \u2014 Prerequisites for:<\/strong> In this case, operational creditor failed to prove operational debt and its default and there was a pre-existing dispute as to existence of such debt. Disputes raised by corporate debtor prior to receipt of demand notice and the demand notice also replied to within the statutory prescribed period of 10 days. The Supreme Court held that application under S. 9 was rightly rejected by NCLT and NCLAT. [Allied Silica Ltd. v. Tata Chemicals Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/Ab0018Ji\">(2021) 4 SCC 515<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 \u2014 S. 20 \u2014 Acquittal of co-accused:<\/strong> Claim of parity is not available to the appellant, when unlike the appellant, none of the co-accused were apprehended at the spot and no evidence produced to connect them with the alleged offence. Contrarily, not only was appellant apprehended at the spot of the incident but also found in conscious possession of the contraband. [Sk. Sakkar v. State of W.B., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/4c7m8ik3\">(2021) 4 SCC 483<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Reservation, Concession, Exemption, Relaxation and Affirmative Action \u2014 Migration of Category:<\/strong> Candidates belonging to vertical reservation categories are entitled to be selected in \u201cOpen or General\u201d category on basis of their merit and in such circumstances their selection cannot be counted against their respective quota for vertical reservation. In case of migration to open category based on merit, manner in which vertical reservation and horizontal reservation are to be applied, explained in detail. [Saurav Yadav v. State of U.P., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/z49DVRaB\">(2021) 4 SCC 542<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 \u2014 Ss. 2(5) and 2(zc) r\/w S. 2(i) of the 1995 Act \u2014 Dilated Cardiomyopathy \u2014 Whether disability:<\/strong> S. 2(i) of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, taking into account visual disability, locomotor disability, mental illness, mental retardation, hearing impairment and leprosy but not heart ailment. Under S. 2(s) of the 2016 Act, \u201ca person with disabilities\u201d is defined as a person with long term physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairment which prevented his full and effective participation in society. S. 2(zc) defines \u201cspecified disability\u201d as those mentioned in Schedule to the 2016 Act which envisage \u201cphysical disability\u201d, \u201cintellectual disability\u201d and \u201cmental behaviour\u201d. Dilated Cardiomyopathy condition neither specified disability her relatable to broad spectrum of impairments, which hinders full and effective participation in society. Thus, Dilated Cardiomyopathy condition of appellant does not bring his case either within ambit of 1995 Act or the 2016 Act. [Nawal Kishore Sharma v. Union of India, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/ZxwgIf5h\">(2021) 4 SCC 487<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Service Law \u2014 Pension \u2014 Cut-off date\/point \u2014 Validity and binding effect of \u2014 Scope of judicial review \u2014 Freedom of employer to introduce new schemes and benefits having regard to its financial health:<\/strong> In this case,\u00a0 Pension scheme was introduced vide Noti. dt. 6-10-1995 w.e.f. 5-6-1995 i.e. the date on which scheme was approved by Cabinet\/Government. Respondent Union employees retiring prior to 5-6-1995 and governed by CPF scheme, held not entitled to pension under pension scheme in question. [Himachal RTC v. Retired Employees Union, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/j9YfUN6O\">(2021) 4 SCC 502<\/a>]<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Service Law \u2014 Police \u2014 Recruitment Process \u2014 Post of Police Sub-Inspector:<\/strong> Recruitment over and above notified vacancies, not permissible. [Gajanan Babulal Bansode v. State of Maharashtra, <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/p5lkhH9F\">(2021) 4 SCC 494<\/a>]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 Pt. II and S. 20 \u2014 Law of arbitration\/curial law\/seat <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":249204,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,16],"tags":[4751,46753,26884,29785,11411],"class_list":["post-252783","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-supremecourtcases","tag-scc","tag-2021-scc-vol-4-part-3","tag-cases-reported","tag-law","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>2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3\" \/>\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\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/\" \/>\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=\"2021-08-17T06:30:13+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\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=\"8 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\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/\",\"name\":\"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2021-08-17T06:30:13+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"description\":\"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3\"}]},{\"@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":"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3 | SCC Times","description":"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3","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\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3","og_description":"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2021-08-17T06:30:13+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"8 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/","name":"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg","datePublished":"2021-08-17T06:30:13+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"description":"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg","width":1331,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/17\/2021-scc-vol-4-part-3\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"2021 SCC Vol. 4 Part 3"}]},{"@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":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":6164,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/04\/arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996-pt-i-or-pt-ii-doctrine-of-severability-2\/","url_meta":{"origin":252783,"position":0},"title":"Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 Pt. I or Pt. II \u2014 Doctrine of severability","author":"Sucheta","date":"September 4, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Cases Reported in 2014 SCC Vol. 7 August 28, 2014 Part 4Law of substantive contract does not determine law of arbitration agreement\/lex arbitri. Parties are entitled to agree that law of one country would govern substantive contract and laws of another country would apply to arbitration agreement. Parties can also\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;SCC Weekly&quot;","block_context":{"text":"SCC Weekly","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/supremecourtcases\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6218,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2014\/09\/04\/arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996-pt-i-or-pt-ii-doctrine-of-severability\/","url_meta":{"origin":252783,"position":1},"title":"Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 Pt. I or Pt. II \u2014 Doctrine of severability","author":"Sucheta","date":"September 4, 2014","format":false,"excerpt":"Cases Reported in 2014 SCC Vol. 7 August 28, 2014 Part 4Law of substantive contract does not determine law of arbitration agreement\/lex arbitri. Parties are entitled to agree that law of one country would govern substantive contract and laws of another country would apply to arbitration agreement. Parties can also\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Alternate Dispute Resolution&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Alternate Dispute Resolution","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/alternate_dispute_resolution\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.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":252783,"position":2},"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":244305,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/01\/scc\/","url_meta":{"origin":252783,"position":3},"title":"2021 SCC Vol. 1 Part 3","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 1, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Read the seminal judgment of Supreme Court on requirements for a premises in question to qualify as \"shared household\" for purposes of the Domestic Violence Act, expertly analysed by our Editors in over 12 short notes in the SCC Issue dated 21st January, 2021 (Vol. 1 Part 3). Is it\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":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":245855,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/20\/2021-scc-vol-2-part-1\/","url_meta":{"origin":252783,"position":4},"title":"2021 SCC Vol. 2 Part 1","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 20, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"SCC Issue dated February 14th, 2021 (Vol. 2 Part 1) Read the decisive judgment of the three-Judge Bench in the Vidya Drolia case, dexterously analysed by our Editors in over 21 short notes. The Judgment expounds on what is arbitrable and what is not. It propounds a fourfold test for\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":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":268453,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/15\/joinder-of-non-signatories-a-stepping-stone-towards-international-commercial-arbitrations\/","url_meta":{"origin":252783,"position":5},"title":"Joinder of Non-Signatories: A Stepping Stone Towards International Commercial Arbitrations","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 15, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"by Simran Pahwa\u2020 and Yasha Goyal\u2020\u2020","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\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-252.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-252.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-252.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-252.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-252.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/252783","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=252783"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/252783\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/249204"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=252783"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=252783"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=252783"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}