{"id":355235,"date":"2025-08-01T11:00:29","date_gmt":"2025-08-01T05:30:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=355235"},"modified":"2025-08-04T17:54:30","modified_gmt":"2025-08-04T12:24:30","slug":"termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/","title":{"rendered":"Calcutta HC upholds Rs 14.49 crore arbitral award to Sourav Ganguly in Termination of Player Representation Agreement Case"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Calcutta High Court:<\/span> The present petition was filed under Section 34<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (\u2018the Act\u2019) by the Petitioner- Percept Talent Management Ltd. (\u2018Percept\u2019) challenging an award dated 9-12-2018, read with the supplementary award dated 8-03-2019 (collectively referred to as \u201cthe award\u201d) which had granted former cricketer Sourav Ganguly Rs 14.49 crore with interest and costs. A Single Judge Bench of Ravi Krishan Kapur<\/span>, J., dismissed the challenge, holding that an arbitral award could not be interfered unless it was perverse or had been passed in violation of grounds enumerated under section 34<\/a> of the Act<\/a>. The Court emphasised that there could be no re-appreciation of the findings by the Arbitral Tribunal (\u2018Tribunal\u2019), nor did the Court substitute its own view or re-interpret the entire documentary evidence.<\/p>\n

Background:<\/h3>\n

Sourav Ganguly, a cricketer of international repute, entered into a Player Representation Agreement (\u2018PRA\u2019) on 22-10-2003 with Percept\u2019s subsidiary (Petitioner 2) which was later assigned to Percept Talent Management Ltd. The agreement appointed Percept as his sole and exclusive manager. Following his brief non-selection from the Indian Cricket Team between February and November 2006, Percept terminated the PRA on 21-11-2007. The dispute was referred to arbitration, where Sourav Ganguly alleged the termination was unwarranted and contrary to the terms of the PRA. He claimed that he was entitled to the balance of the minimum guaranteed amount which was assured under the PRA and further alleged that the revenue received from different contracts had not been deposited in the escrow account as contemplated by the PRA.<\/p>\n

The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs 14.49 crore with additional interest thereon at 12 per cent per annum from 21-11-2007 till the date of passing of the award with further interest at 12 per cent per annum from the date of passing of the award till realisation with additional costs of Rs 50 lakh. The Tribunal also refused the counter claim made by Percept that they were entitled to the benefit of the Kolkata Knight Riders (\u2018KKR\u2019) contract.<\/p>\n

Percept argued that it retained an unconditional right to terminate the PRA \u201cat any time\u201d after Sourav Ganguly\u2019s non selection in 2006. It also contended that Sourav Ganguly\u2019s KKR Contract (i.e. Indian Premier League Playing Contract) fell within the PRA\u2019s revenue-sharing clause, and challenged the tribunal\u2019s rejection of its reliance on audit certificates prepared by its auditors, Patkar & Pendese, which allegedly confirmed deductions. It further claimed that failure to accept the auditor\u2019s certification violated contractual terms and constituted an expected matter. Additionally, the non-liability of Percept\u2019s subsidiary after assignment was contented.<\/p>\n

Contrarily, Sourav Ganguly contended that the Tribunal\u2019s findings were reasoned and the interpretation of the terms of the PRA was exclusive domain of the Tribunal, hence no grounds under Section 34<\/a> of the Act<\/a> were made out.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Decision:<\/h3>\n

The Court emphasised that in deciding an application under section 34<\/a> of the Act<\/a>, the Court did not act as an Appellate Court nor re-appreciate evidence findings rendered by the Tribunal since there was a limited and circumscribed scope of interference only on the grounds enumerated under section 34<\/a> of the Act<\/a>. The Court further observed that an award based on little evidence or on evidence which did not measure up in quality to a trained legal mind would not be held to be invalid on this score, because a possible view by an Arbitrator on facts had necessarily to pass muster, as the Arbitrator was the ultimate master of the quantity and quality of evidence to be relied upon when he delivered his arbitral award<\/p>\n

The Court highlighted that the construction of the contract terms was exclusively for the Arbitral Tribunal as the award was based on detailed consideration of the PRA, correspondence, and evidence, including financial records, there was nothing perverse in the Tribunal\u2019s view. The Court noted that the award discussed the nature of obligations under the PRA, the impugned termination letter, and the lack of prior protest and also considered the parties\u2019 conduct. Though petitioners alleged non-performance, no contemporaneous proof was furnished. The Court further observed that it fell within the Tribunal\u2019s domain, and since its approach was neither arbitrary nor capricious, it was the final authority on facts.<\/p>\n

The Court pointed out that as a general principle, if there were two plausible interpretations of the terms and conditions of the contract, then no fault could be found if the Tribunal proceeded to accept one interpretation as against the other, and the reasoning of the Arbitral Tribunal in this regard was within the permissible bounds of arbitral discretion under section 34<\/a> of the Act<\/a>. The Court observed that in the facts and circumstances, the interpretation of the relevant clauses of the PRA vis-a-vis the KKR contract by the Tribunal were both possible and plausible.<\/p>\n

The Court emphasised that a Court should not interfere with the Tribunal\u2019s decision unless it was perverse or arbitrary, as no part of the award violated justice, morality, or the fundamental policy of Indian law. The Court observed that an auditor\u2019s certificate, without examining the author or allowing cross-examination, was not proof, as assessment of evidence lies with the Tribunal. The Court further noted that the Tribunal found that no evidence was at all adduced in respect of the auditor\u2019s certificate nor did the maker of the documents depose.<\/p>\n

The Court dismissed the Percept\u2019s petition on termination of Player Representation Agreement, IPC<\/a> revenue share, audit certificates, and assignment of liabilities, concluding that there were no grounds under Section 34<\/a> of the Act<\/a> which justified any interference with the impugned award.<\/p>\n

[Percept Talent Management Ltd. v. Sourav Chandidas Ganguly, 2025 SCC OnLine Cal 6036<\/a>, decided on 22-07-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

For the Petitioner:<\/span> Surojit Nath Mitra, Senior Advocate, Rajarshi Dutta, Advocate, Sarbajit Mukherjee, Advocate, Ranajit Kr. Basu, Advocate, Prayag Kandhar, Advocate<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> Samrat Sen, Senior Advocate, Paritosh Sinha, Advocate, Amitava Mitra, Advocate, S. Dutt, Advocate, Sonia Nandy, Advocate, Naman Agarwal, Advocate<\/p>\n

Buy Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u00a0 HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"arbitration<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“A possible view by an Arbitrator on facts has necessarily to pass muster as the Arbitrator is the ultimate master of the quantity and quality of evidence to be relied upon when he delivers his arbitral award.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":355241,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2689,86415,53326,38727,60587,86414,86416,86413,32304,47297],"class_list":["post-355235","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Calcutta_High_Court","tag-indian-cricket-team","tag-indian-premier-league","tag-judicial-intervention","tag-justice-ravi-krishan-kapur","tag-kolkata-knight-riders","tag-percept-talent-management-ltd","tag-player-representation-agreement","tag-section-34-arbitration-and-conciliation-act","tag-sourav-ganguly"],"yoast_head":"\nTermination of Player Representation Agreement: Calcutta HC relief to Sourav Ganguly| SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Termination of Player Representation Agreement: Calcutta HC reaffirmed limited judicial interference in arbitration while upholding Rs 14.49 crore award in favour of Sourav Ganguly\" \/>\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\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Calcutta HC upholds Rs 14.49 crore arbitral award to Sourav Ganguly in Termination of Player Representation Agreement Case\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Termination of Player Representation Agreement: Calcutta HC reaffirmed limited judicial interference in arbitration while upholding Rs 14.49 crore award in favour of Sourav Ganguly\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/\" \/>\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=\"2025-08-01T05:30:29+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-08-04T12:24:30+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Termination-of-Player-Representation-Agreement.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Calcutta HC upholds Rs 14.49 crore arbitral award to Sourav Ganguly in Termination of Player Representation Agreement Case\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Editor\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"5 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\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/\",\"name\":\"Termination of Player Representation Agreement: Calcutta HC relief to Sourav Ganguly| SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Termination-of-Player-Representation-Agreement.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-08-01T05:30:29+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-08-04T12:24:30+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Termination of Player Representation Agreement: Calcutta HC reaffirmed limited judicial interference in arbitration while upholding Rs 14.49 crore award in favour of Sourav Ganguly\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Termination-of-Player-Representation-Agreement.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Termination-of-Player-Representation-Agreement.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"Termination of Player Representation Agreement\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Calcutta HC upholds Rs 14.49 crore arbitral award to Sourav Ganguly in Termination of Player Representation Agreement Case\"}]},{\"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\",\"name\":\"Editor\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Editor\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Termination of Player Representation Agreement: Calcutta HC relief to Sourav Ganguly| SCC Times","description":"Termination of Player Representation Agreement: Calcutta HC reaffirmed limited judicial interference in arbitration while upholding Rs 14.49 crore award in favour of Sourav Ganguly","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\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Calcutta HC upholds Rs 14.49 crore arbitral award to Sourav Ganguly in Termination of Player Representation Agreement Case","og_description":"Termination of Player Representation Agreement: Calcutta HC reaffirmed limited judicial interference in arbitration while upholding Rs 14.49 crore award in favour of Sourav Ganguly","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-08-01T05:30:29+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-08-04T12:24:30+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Termination-of-Player-Representation-Agreement.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Calcutta HC upholds Rs 14.49 crore arbitral award to Sourav Ganguly in Termination of Player Representation Agreement Case","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/","name":"Termination of Player Representation Agreement: Calcutta HC relief to Sourav Ganguly| SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Termination-of-Player-Representation-Agreement.webp","datePublished":"2025-08-01T05:30:29+00:00","dateModified":"2025-08-04T12:24:30+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Termination of Player Representation Agreement: Calcutta HC reaffirmed limited judicial interference in arbitration while upholding Rs 14.49 crore award in favour of Sourav Ganguly","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Termination-of-Player-Representation-Agreement.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Termination-of-Player-Representation-Agreement.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"Termination of Player Representation Agreement"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/08\/01\/termination-of-player-representation-agreement-cal-hc-upholds-arbitral-award-in-sourav-ganguly-favour\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Calcutta HC upholds Rs 14.49 crore arbitral award to Sourav Ganguly in Termination of Player Representation Agreement Case"}]},{"@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\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe","name":"Editor","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/34e366be721c41333586de05faa13743195f5b142dcd7a015c6fabd2389521d0?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Editor"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_4\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/08\/Termination-of-Player-Representation-Agreement.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":372159,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/09\/india-corporate-commercial-law-developments-2025\/","url_meta":{"origin":355235,"position":0},"title":"Corporate & Commercial Law 2025: How Courts, Regulators and Lawmakers reinforced accountability and curbed abuse","author":"Soumya Yadav","date":"January 9, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"This roundup highlights key 2025 corporate and commercial law developments from Adani\u2019s HDIL resolution and Vedanta\u2019s demerger setback to SEBI\u2019s insider trading penalties, Google\u2019s CCI settlement, and the pump-and-dump ban involving actor Arshad Warsi.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"India Corporate & Commercial Law Developments 2025","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/India-Corporate-Commercial-Law-Developments-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/India-Corporate-Commercial-Law-Developments-2025.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/India-Corporate-Commercial-Law-Developments-2025.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/India-Corporate-Commercial-Law-Developments-2025.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":265878,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/04\/25\/scope-of-s-9-of-ac-act-cannot-be-extended-to-enforcement-of-award-or-granting-fruits-of-award-to-award-holder\/","url_meta":{"origin":355235,"position":1},"title":"Cal HC | Scope of S. 9 of A&C Act cannot be extended to enforcement of award or granting fruits of award to award holder as an interim measure; application dismissed","author":"Editor","date":"April 25, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court: Ravi Krishan Kapur, J. dismissed an application which was filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (\u2018the Act\u2019) wherein liberty to withdraw a sum of Rs 4,11,89,759\/- deposited by the award debtor, State of West Bengal, with the Registrar, Original Side of this\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\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":54621,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/07\/05\/service-tax-demand-notice-on-saurav-ganguly-quashed\/","url_meta":{"origin":355235,"position":2},"title":"Service Tax demand notice on Saurav Ganguly, quashed","author":"Sucheta","date":"July 5, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court: Holding that the show cause notice dated 26th September 2011, demanding service tax from the Petitioner, was barred by limitation, the Court constituted by Justice Arijit Banerjee\u00a0 quashed it, as well as the Circular of the Central Board for Custom and Excise dated 26th July, 2010 which\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\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/06\/calcutta-court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":297360,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/07\/20\/if-supplier-is-medium-enterprise-defaulting-buyer-need-not-to-pay-interest-three-times-of-bank-rate-calcutta-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":355235,"position":3},"title":"Defaulting Buyers exempted from paying 3 times the Bank Interest Rate under Section 16 of the MSMED Act when supplier is \u2018medium enterprise\u2019: Calcutta High Court","author":"Ritu","date":"July 20, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe irrationality of the quantum of the costs imposed will be considered at the time of determining whether the Award should be set aside under Section 34 of the 1996 Act.\u201d","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\/2023\/04\/calcutta-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\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":304893,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/10\/16\/calcutta-high-court-allows-challenge-under-section-34-of-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-scc-blog-legal-research\/","url_meta":{"origin":355235,"position":4},"title":"Arbitrator’s failure to decide on Interest Claim amounts to a “Decision”, Calcutta High Court allows challenge under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act","author":"Ritu","date":"October 16, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court held Arbitrator's refusal to decide question of interest under the MSMED Act constitutes a \u201cdecision\u201d and therefore, can be challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.","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\/2023\/04\/calcutta-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\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":312455,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/01\/30\/calcutta-hc-conditional-permission-sit-in-demonstration-ourav-ganguly-cricket-coaching-camp-scc-blog\/","url_meta":{"origin":355235,"position":5},"title":"Calcutta High Court grants conditional permission for Sit-in-Demonstration in front of Sourav Ganguly Cricket Coaching Camp","author":"Ritu","date":"January 30, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Calcutta High Court tasked the respondent authorities with ensuring the safety of participants and passerby on the demonstration dates, preventing untoward incidents or breaches of peace.","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\/2023\/04\/calcutta-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\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/calcutta-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/355235","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\/67011"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=355235"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/355235\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/355241"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=355235"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=355235"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=355235"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}