{"id":373403,"date":"2026-01-21T18:00:33","date_gmt":"2026-01-21T12:30:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=373403"},"modified":"2026-01-27T09:41:47","modified_gmt":"2026-01-27T04:11:47","slug":"del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi HC refuses interim relief against IRCTC’s termination of catering contract; cites multiple passenger complaints and unsatisfactory service"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> While hearing an appeal filed under Section 37(2)(b)<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (‘Act’) challenging the interim order dated 12-1-2026 (‘impugned order’) wherein the Sole Arbitrator in the Delhi International Arbitration Centre had dismissed the appellant’s application under Section 17<\/a> of the Act<\/a>, the Single Judge Bench of the Mini Pushkarna, J, reiterated the limited scope of judicial interference under Section 37<\/a> of the Act<\/a> and held that in view of the persistent passenger and consumer complaints against the appellant, IRCTC was prima facie justified in terminating the catering contract. Finding no perversity, patent illegality, or jurisdictional infirmity in the impugned order, the Court declined to interfere with the impugned order and dismissed the appeal.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

The respondent IRCTC had floated a tender for construction and operation of base kitchens (Part A) and provision of onboard catering services in certain cluster trains (Part B). The cluster included the Purushottam Express, running between New Delhi and Puri (‘subject train’). The contract period was five years, extendable by two years.<\/p>\n

The appellant had been declared the successful bidder for the cluster and was granted the license to operate base kitchens and provide onboard catering services. Disputes subsequently arose between the parties. The appellant had complained about the presence of unauthorized food vendors on the train, which allegedly affected its contractual rights. IRCTC, on the other hand, had issued two show cause notices dated 3-4-2025 and 8-4-2025, alleging service deficiencies by the appellant. The appellant had submitted replies and sought a personal hearing.<\/p>\n

Following the hearing, IRCTC had passed a termination order, terminating the appellant’s license for the subject train due to unsatisfactory responses and continued breaches. The appellant had challenged the termination by filing a petition under Section 9<\/a> of the Act<\/a>. Vide the order dated 12-12-2025, the Court had dismissed the Section 9 petition and vacated the interim protection. The appellant had been granted seven days’ time to hand over the train and cease operations. On the same day, in proceedings under Section 11(6)<\/a> of the Act<\/a>, the disputes were referred to a sole arbitrator.<\/p>\n

After expiry of the seven-day period, IRCTC had issued a termination notice directing the appellant to stop onboard catering services. The appellant had challenged the Section 9 judgment in appeal under Section 37<\/a> of the Act<\/a> which was subsequently disposed of.<\/p>\n

Consequently, the appellant had filed an application under Section 17<\/a> of the Act<\/a> before the sole arbitrator who had granted limited interim protection, allowing the appellant to continue operations temporarily, without expressing any opinion on merits. After hearing the parties, the arbitrator, by the impugned order, dismissed the Section 17 application, holding that restoration of a terminated contract at the interim stage was neither justified nor in public interest.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the instant appeal had been filed.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law and Decision<\/h3>\n

At the outset, the Court reiterated that its power of interference under Section 37(2)(b)<\/a> of the Act<\/a> is extremely limited. It emphasized that where the view taken by the arbitral tribunal is plausible and free from perversity, the Court cannot interfere. The Act mandates minimal judicial intervention, and courts cannot substitute their own view for that of the arbitral tribunal unless the impugned order is patently illegal, perverse, or suffers from jurisdictional error.<\/p>\n

Relying on settled precedent, the Court noted that orders passed by an arbitral tribunal under Section 17<\/a> of the Act<\/a> are discretionary and interlocutory in nature. The same restraints that apply while examining a challenge to a final arbitral award under Section 34<\/a> of the Act<\/a> equally apply to appeals under Section 37<\/a> of the Act<\/a>. Interference at the interlocutory stage is discouraged, as it may disrupt ongoing arbitral proceedings.<\/p>\n

On facts, the Court observed that the appellant’s license for onboard catering services was terminated due to persistent passenger complaints and unsatisfactory service. The termination was preceded by several show cause notices, penalty letters, and repeated communications highlighting service deficiencies. The respondent had placed on record multiple passenger complaints, including issues of hygiene, food quality, overcharging, and service standards, particularly in relation to the subject train. These complaints were also reflected on the Catering Service Information Management (‘CSIM’) Portal and were not disputed by the appellant.<\/p>\n

The Court found that the appellant was repeatedly put on notice regarding deteriorating service standards. It noted that Clause 6.10 of the Master License Agreement (‘Agreement’) permitted termination without prior notice in cases of unsatisfactory service and persistent passenger complaints. The termination order specifically relied on this clause, and therefore, prima facie, the respondent’s action could not be faulted.<\/p>\n

With respect to the appellant’s contention regarding the absence of a 15-day cure notice under Clause 8.2 of the Agreement, the Court agreed with the arbitral tribunal’s prima facie view that the intent of the clause stood substantially fulfilled. The appellant was continuously informed of deficiencies and complaints and was not taken by surprise.<\/p>\n

The Court further held that at the interim stage, neither the arbitral tribunal nor the Court was required to finally decide the legality of the termination. The limited enquiry was whether the respondent was prima facie justified in terminating the agreement. It also accepted the respondent’s submission that courts should not direct continuation of a contractual arrangement that already stands terminated.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that interpretation of contractual provisions lies primarily within the domain of the arbitral tribunal. The arbitral tribunal’s finding that granting interim protection would be against public interest, in view of persistent passenger complaints, was held to be a plausible and reasoned view.<\/p>\n

Finding no perversity, patent illegality, or jurisdictional infirmity in the impugned order, the Court declined to interfere. The appeal was dismissed, with a clarification that the observations made would not affect the merits of the arbitral proceedings.<\/p>\n

[R.K. Associates & Hoteliers (P) Ltd. v. IRCTC, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 212<\/a>, decided on 19-1-2026<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

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

For the Appellant:<\/span> Sandeep Sethi, Sudhir Makkar, Senior Advocates, Jasmeet Singh, Mahinder Singh Hura, Saif Ali, Pushpendra S. Bhadoriya, Vijay Sharma, Krisna Gambhir, Shreya Sethi, Riya Kumar, Akhilesh Kumar, Aadhya Shrotriya, Sanya C. Oberoi, Pranav Menon, Saurav, Ajith Willyams, Advocates<\/p>\n

For the Respondent:<\/span> Saurav Agrawal, Rajat Malhotra, Saksham Gupta, Madhu K. Singh, Kiran Devrani, Anshuman Chowdhary, Nikita Rathi, Parmeet Singh, Advocates<\/p>\n

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

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

“There are multiple complaints of over-charging, service quality, hygiene, food quality, etc. against the appellant, which presents a troubling state of affairs as regards the on-board catering services being offered by the appellant on the subject train.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67539,"featured_media":373406,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[97272,40741,2543,97273,97270,69176,97271,97274],"class_list":["post-373403","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-appeal-under-arbitration-act","tag-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-irctc-catering-tender-cancellation","tag-irctc-tender","tag-justice-mini-pushkarna","tag-section-37-of-ac-act","tag-tender-terminated-due-to-consumer-complaints"],"yoast_head":"\nDel HC refuses relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court refuses relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract due to persistent consumer complaints on hygiene, food quality and overcharging.\" \/>\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\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Delhi HC refuses interim relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract; cites multiple passenger complaints and unsatisfactory service\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court refuses relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract due to persistent consumer complaints on hygiene, food quality and overcharging.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/\" \/>\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=\"2026-01-21T12:30:33+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-01-27T04:11:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/relief-against-IRCTCs-termination-of-catering-contract.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=\"Prarthana Gupta\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Delhi HC refuses interim relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract; cites multiple passenger complaints and unsatisfactory service\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Prarthana Gupta\" \/>\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\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/\",\"name\":\"Del HC refuses relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/relief-against-IRCTCs-termination-of-catering-contract.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-01-21T12:30:33+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-01-27T04:11:47+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ffe9a3c7eae30c883786fd440bcab382\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court refuses relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract due to persistent consumer complaints on hygiene, food quality and overcharging.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/relief-against-IRCTCs-termination-of-catering-contract.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/relief-against-IRCTCs-termination-of-catering-contract.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Delhi HC refuses interim relief against IRCTC’s termination of catering contract; cites multiple passenger complaints and unsatisfactory service\"}]},{\"@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\/ffe9a3c7eae30c883786fd440bcab382\",\"name\":\"Prarthana Gupta\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cd5380f62642d388922bf1a84a49cf7fe9acb150b43abdb5e1c20c15c40a94a9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cd5380f62642d388922bf1a84a49cf7fe9acb150b43abdb5e1c20c15c40a94a9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Prarthana Gupta\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/prarthana\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Del HC refuses relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract | SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court refuses relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract due to persistent consumer complaints on hygiene, food quality and overcharging.","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\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Delhi HC refuses interim relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract; cites multiple passenger complaints and unsatisfactory service","og_description":"Delhi High Court refuses relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract due to persistent consumer complaints on hygiene, food quality and overcharging.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-01-21T12:30:33+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-01-27T04:11:47+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/relief-against-IRCTCs-termination-of-catering-contract.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Prarthana Gupta","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Delhi HC refuses interim relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract; cites multiple passenger complaints and unsatisfactory service","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Prarthana Gupta","Est. reading time":"5 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/","name":"Del HC refuses relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/relief-against-IRCTCs-termination-of-catering-contract.webp","datePublished":"2026-01-21T12:30:33+00:00","dateModified":"2026-01-27T04:11:47+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/ffe9a3c7eae30c883786fd440bcab382"},"description":"Delhi High Court refuses relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract due to persistent consumer complaints on hygiene, food quality and overcharging.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/relief-against-IRCTCs-termination-of-catering-contract.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/relief-against-IRCTCs-termination-of-catering-contract.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"relief against IRCTC's termination of catering contract"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/21\/del-hc-refuses-relief-against-irctcs-termination-of-catering-contract\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Delhi HC refuses interim relief against IRCTC’s termination of catering contract; cites multiple passenger complaints and unsatisfactory service"}]},{"@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\/ffe9a3c7eae30c883786fd440bcab382","name":"Prarthana Gupta","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cd5380f62642d388922bf1a84a49cf7fe9acb150b43abdb5e1c20c15c40a94a9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/cd5380f62642d388922bf1a84a49cf7fe9acb150b43abdb5e1c20c15c40a94a9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Prarthana Gupta"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/prarthana\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/relief-against-IRCTCs-termination-of-catering-contract.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":290977,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/04\/29\/delhi-high-court-doctrine-of-lis-pendens-a-discretionary-remedy-not-applicable-in-service-contracts-legal-news-legal-research-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":373403,"position":0},"title":"Whether Doctrine of lis pendens applicable on in-service contracts? Delhi High Court answers","author":"Aastha","date":"April 29, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act is an expression of the principle \u201cpending a litigation nothing new should be introduced\u201d. It provides that pendente lite, neither party to the litigation, in which any right to immovable property is in question, can alienate or otherwise deal with such property\u2026","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\/04\/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\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/delhi-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":330009,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/09\/04\/roundup-top-case-laws-on-arbitration-july-august-2024\/","url_meta":{"origin":373403,"position":1},"title":"Top cases on Arbitration Law from July to August 2024","author":"Editor","date":"September 4, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"A quick recap of the latest rulings on Arbitration Law by the High Courts.","rel":"","context":"In "Legal RoundUp"","block_context":{"text":"Legal RoundUp","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/columns-for-roundup\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Arbitration Roundup","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Arbitration-Roundup.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Arbitration-Roundup.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Arbitration-Roundup.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/09\/Arbitration-Roundup.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":284055,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/16\/delhi-high-court-upholds-arbitral-award-as-reappreciation-of-evidence-is-beyond-the-scope-of-section-37-arbitration-act-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawareness\/","url_meta":{"origin":373403,"position":2},"title":"Delhi High Court finds no ground for interference as reappreciation of evidence is beyond the scope of Section 37 Arbitration Act","author":"Editor","date":"February 16, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The scope of a challenge under Section 34 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Section 37 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 is limited to the grounds stipulated in Section 34 Arbitration Act.","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\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-418.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":273278,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/08\/delhi-high-court-amendment-application-being-rejected-as-belated-does-not-constitute-interim-award-susceptible-to-challenge-under-s-34-arbitration-conciliation-act-1996\/","url_meta":{"origin":373403,"position":3},"title":"Delhi High Court: Amendment application being rejected as ‘belated’ does not constitute interim award susceptible to challenge under S 34 Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996","author":"Editor","date":"September 8, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Delhi High Court: In a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, (\u2018A&C Act') challenging an order passed wherein the arbitrator rejected an application filed by the petitioner for amendment of the statement of claim, Prateek Jalan, J. dismissed the petition as non-maintainable\u2026","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\/2022\/06\/delhi_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\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/delhi_high_court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":250841,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/07\/06\/arbitral-award-2\/","url_meta":{"origin":373403,"position":4},"title":"Del HC | Ambiguity in contractually stipulated obligations favours whom? Court discusses while refusing interference in arbitral award","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"July 6, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Delhi High Court: Sanjeev Narula, J.,\u00a0refused to interfere in the interim arbitral award whereby the sole arbitrator had allowed certain claims of the respondent in arbitration proceedings against the appellant-IRCTC. IRCTC sought the setting aside of the interim arbitral award, whereby Sole Arbitrator had allowed certain claims of the Respondent\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\/07\/Sanjeev-Narula-250x300.jpeg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":327095,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/22\/interim-ex-parte-order-appeal-s37-commercial-court-arbitration-act-karnataka-hc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":373403,"position":5},"title":"Order granting\/declining ex-parte interim measure in Commercial Arbitration Dispute is appealable under S. 37, A&C Act, 1996: Karnataka HC","author":"Sucheta","date":"July 22, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"In the instant appeal, the Court had to consider the interplay of Sections 9 and 37 of the A&C Act; Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 and Rule 9 of High Court of Karnataka Arbitration (Proceedings before the Courts) Rules, 2001.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Karnataka High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Karnataka-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Karnataka-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Karnataka-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Karnataka-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\/373403","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\/67539"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=373403"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/373403\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":373757,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/373403\/revisions\/373757"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/373406"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=373403"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=373403"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=373403"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}