{"id":380078,"date":"2026-04-03T11:30:54","date_gmt":"2026-04-03T06:00:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=380078"},"modified":"2026-04-03T13:51:22","modified_gmt":"2026-04-03T08:21:22","slug":"narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/","title":{"rendered":"CAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

April 02, 2026, Mumbai:<\/span><\/span> Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (“MMRDA<\/span>”) and Mumbai Metro One Private Limited (“MMOPL<\/span>”) entered into a Concession Agreement dated March 7, 2007 for the construction, operation and maintenance of the elevated Metro-1 line connecting Versova, Andheri and Ghatkopar (“Project<\/span>”). MMOPL had availed loan facilities of approximately Rs. 1,650 Crores from a consortium of lenders (Canara Bank, Indian Bank, Bank of Maharashtra, State Bank of India and IDBI Bank) for the Project. The loan facilities were secured, inter alia<\/span>, by a first-ranking pari-passu mortgage and charge over all receivables and accounts, including all monies received by MMOPL in relation to the Project. Such receivables were required to be deposited into an escrow account established pursuant to the Escrow Agreement dated March 16, 2016 (“Escrow Agreement<\/span>”). MMOPL had been classified as a non-performing asset (NPA) in 2018, and the lenders had initiated recovery proceedings, including before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-III, New Delhi.<\/span><\/p>\n

Disputes arose between MMOPL and MMRDA under the Concession Agreement, resulting in MMOPL initiating arbitration proceedings against MMRDA. A three-member arbitral tribunal delivered an award dated August 29, 2023, read with a corrected award dated February 26, 2024 (“Impugned Award<\/span>”), in favour of MMOPL, directing MMRDA to pay approximately INR 496.48 Crores (excluding interest) to MMOPL towards its various claims. MMRDA thereafter filed Commercial Arbitration Petition No. 427 of 2024 before the Bombay High Court under Section 34<\/a> of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996<\/a> (“Section 34 Petition<\/span>”), challenging the Impugned Award. MMRDA also filed Interim Application No. 3642 of 2024 (“Stay Application<\/span>”) seeking an unconditional stay of the Impugned Award. The Bombay High Court, vide<\/span> its order dated June 10, 2025, directed deposit of 100% of the awarded amount along with interest pending determination of the Section 34 Petition. The said order of the Bombay High Court was modified by the Supreme Court vide its order dated July 14, 2025, reducing the deposit amount to 50% of the amount awarded along with interest. Accordingly, MMRDA deposited an amount of Rs. 560,21,39,542\/- with the Bombay High Court.<\/p>\n

In the meanwhile, vide<\/span> a Deed of Assignment dated December 23, 2024, the consortium of lenders assigned the loans granted to MMOPL, in favour of National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited (“NARCL<\/span>”). NARCL filed Interim Application No. 3495 of 2025 seeking intervention in the Section 34 Petition, contending that in the event of the Impugned Award being sustained, the amount deposited by MMRDA along with accrued interest, ought to be transmitted to the escrow account under the Escrow Agreement. Vide<\/span> judgment dated February 24, 2026, the Bombay High Court partly upheld the Impugned Award, allowed NARCL’s intervention application, and directed that the court-deposited sum along with accrued interest be transmitted to the escrow account, the details of which are to be furnished by NARCL.<\/p>\n

This establishes a notable precedent for lenders seeking to protect their security interests against the Borrower directly within Section 34 proceedings between the Borrower and other third parties, by securing payment through a substantive court order rather than being relegated to pursuing separate enforcement proceedings.<\/p>\n

The transaction team was led by Dhananjay Kumar<\/span>, Partner (Head- Insolvency & Restructuring);<\/span> Gathi Prakash Karrah<\/span>, and Surbhi Pareek<\/span>, Partners<\/span>; with assistance from Nidhi Asher<\/span>, Principal<\/span> Associate;<\/span> Aditya Tanay Pandey<\/span> and<\/span> Vidushi Trivedi<\/span>, Associates.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas represented National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited in Section 34 proceedings before the Bombay High Court securing transmission of deposited arbitral amounts to the lender.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67011,"featured_media":380117,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[45282,2],"tags":[101691,101694,101688,101695,101690,101693,101689,101692],"class_list":["post-380078","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-law-firms-news","category-news","tag-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission-judgment-2026","tag-cam-insolvency-restructuring-arbitration-case-india","tag-cyril-amarchand-mangaldas-narcl-section-34-case-bombay-high-court","tag-escrow-account-security-enforcement-arbitration-india","tag-mmopl-mmrda-arbitration-award-transmission-escrow-account-case","tag-narcl-debt-recovery-arbitration-proceedings-india","tag-narcl-intervention-arbitration-section-34-india-lenders-rights","tag-section-34-arbitration-lender-rights-india-precedent"],"yoast_head":"\nCAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas represents National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited in Section 34 case before Bombay High Court.\" \/>\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\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"CAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas represents National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited in Section 34 case before Bombay High Court.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/\" \/>\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=\"2026-04-03T06:00:54+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-04-03T08:21:22+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/blog-13-31.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=\"CAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit\" \/>\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=\"3 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\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/\",\"name\":\"CAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/blog-13-31.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-04-03T06:00:54+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-04-03T08:21:22+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe\"},\"description\":\"Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas represents National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited in Section 34 case before Bombay High Court.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/blog-13-31.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/blog-13-31.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"CAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit | SCC Times\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"CAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit\"}]},{\"@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":"CAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit | SCC Times","description":"Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas represents National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited in Section 34 case before Bombay High Court.","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\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"CAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit","og_description":"Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas represents National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited in Section 34 case before Bombay High Court.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-04-03T06:00:54+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-04-03T08:21:22+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/blog-13-31.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Editor","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"CAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Editor","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/","name":"CAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/blog-13-31.webp","datePublished":"2026-04-03T06:00:54+00:00","dateModified":"2026-04-03T08:21:22+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/84e42bab48238baf12c7e33b3d9761fe"},"description":"Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas represents National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited in Section 34 case before Bombay High Court.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/blog-13-31.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/blog-13-31.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"CAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit | SCC Times"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/03\/narcl-section-34-bombay-high-court-arbitration-deposit-transmission\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"CAM Represents NARCL in Section 34 MMOPL\u2013MMRDA Dispute; Secures Directions to Transfer Deposit"}]},{"@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\/2026\/04\/blog-13-31.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":245450,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/12\/where-one-party-habitually-resides-in-a-foreign-country-arbitration-becomes-an-international-commercial-arbitration-even-when-the-business-is-being-carried-through-an-office-in-india-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":380078,"position":0},"title":"Where one party habitually resides in a foreign country, arbitration becomes an international commercial arbitration even when the business is being carried through an office in India: SC","author":"Editor","date":"March 12, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The Division Bench of R.F. Nariman* and B.R. Gavai, JJ., addressed an important case regarding nature of arbitration under Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Bench ruled, \"If at least one of the parties was either a foreign national, or habitually resident in any country other than India;\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-3-3.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":240351,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/09\/supreme-court-confirms-pre-balco-foreign-awards-cannot-be-challenged-under-section-34-of-arbitration-and-conciliation-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":380078,"position":1},"title":"Supreme Court confirms pre-BALCO foreign awards cannot be challenged under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act","author":"Editor","date":"December 9, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The question before the division bench of Ravindra Bhat and Indira Banerjee, JJ. was whether a foreign award rendered in the pre BALCO[1] era, could be challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The facts in brief were that the respondent and another company \u2018Enco\u2019\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\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/sc-07-2.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":342366,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/02\/26\/contract-discontinuation-without-reasons-arbitrary-bomhc-quashes-mmrdas-order-terminating-consultancy-contract-mumbai-metro-lines\/","url_meta":{"origin":380078,"position":2},"title":"\u2018Discontinuation of contract, without reasons, is arbitrary\u2019; Bombay HC quashes MMRDA\u2019s order terminating Consultancy contract for Mumbai Metro Lines","author":"Simranjeet","date":"February 26, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Clause 2.8.1(f) of the General Conditions of Contract, which enables MMRDA to terminate the contract without assigning any reasons, cannot be read to mean that MMRDA has a licence to act unfairly, or arbitrarily.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-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\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":254702,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/09\/24\/section-34-of-arbitration-and-conciliation-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":380078,"position":3},"title":"Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Whether Courts have the Power to Modify or Vary Arbitral Awards","author":"Editor","date":"September 24, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Rohan Tigadi*","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-120-copy.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-120-copy.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-120-copy.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-120-copy.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/MicrosoftTeams-image-120-copy.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":282904,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/02\/01\/bombay-high-court-sets-aside-arbitral-award-passed-by-facilitation-council-being-barred-by-limitation-and-having-exclusive-jurisdiction-msmed-act-arbitral-tribunal-legalnews-legalresearch-legalawarene\/","url_meta":{"origin":380078,"position":4},"title":"Bombay High Court| Procedure of constitution of the Arbitral Tribunal is overshadowed by MSMED Act, but does not eclipse the agreement between parties in case of exclusive jurisdiction","author":"Editor","date":"February 1, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: In a petition filed by Gammon Engineers & Contractors Pvt. Ltd. under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, 1996 challenging an award passed by the Facilitation Council for Arbitration constituted under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSMED Act) on grounds of territorial jurisdiction\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/Bombay-High-Court-1.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":252402,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/08\/07\/foreign-arbitral-seat\/","url_meta":{"origin":380078,"position":5},"title":"Party Autonomy or Contracting out of Indian Courts \u2014 Analysis of PASL Wind Solutions (P) Ltd. v. GE Power Conversion (India)(P) Ltd.","author":"Editor","date":"August 7, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Lakshmi Subramaniam Iyer* and Aishwarya Dash**","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-80.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-80.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-80.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-80.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/08\/MicrosoftTeams-image-80.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/380078","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=380078"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/380078\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":380116,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/380078\/revisions\/380116"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/380117"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=380078"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=380078"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=380078"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}