Supreme Court of India Judgements

47030 Judgements hosted as on 11/01/2026 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Arbitration

Arbitration

Termination of mandate – Appointment of fresh arbitrator – Earlier Arbitral Tribunal-Stationery Purchase Committee comprising of Additional Secretary, Department of Revenue as President and (i) Deputy Secretary, Department of Revenue, (ii) Deputy Secretary, General Administration Department, (iii) Deputy Secretary, Department of Finance, (iv) Deputy Secretary/Under Secretary, General Administration Department and (v) Senior Deputy Controller of Head Office, Printing as Members, has lost its mandate by operation of law in view of Section 12(5) read with Seventh Schedule and a fresh arbitrator has to be appointed under the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1996

Jan 4, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ELLORA PAPER MILLS LIMITED — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. )…

Arbitration

Arbitral proceedings – Resumption – It is the discretion vested with the Court for remitting the matter to Arbitral Tribunal to give an opportunity to resume the proceedings or not – Words “where it is appropriate” itself indicate that it is the discretion to be exercised by the Court, to remit the matter when requested by a party. Merely because an application is filed under Section 34(4) of the Act by a party, it is not always obligatory on the part of the Court to remit the matter to Arbitral Tribunal

Jan 3, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  I-PAY CLEARING SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. ICICI BANK LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. )…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 34 – Setting aside of arbitral award – At the same time when an order is passed without recourse to arbitration and in utter disregard to the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 34 of the Act will not apply.

Dec 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JHARKHAND URJA VIKAS NIGAM LIMITED — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and R. Subhash…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 34 and 37 – Setting aside of arbitral award – Contract maintenance of road for a length of 31.17 kilometres – Award passed by the Arbitrator awarding the amount/compensation at Rs.45,000/ per km per month up to January, 2008 under claim Nos.1 and 8 is hereby confirmed – Award passed by the Arbitrator awarding the amount/compensation at Rs.45,000/ per km per month from February, 2008 to 31.05.2010 i.e. till the end of the contract is hereby quashed and set aside – Appeal partly allowed.

Dec 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF HARYANA — Appellant Vs. M/S. SHIV SHANKAR CONSTRUCTION CO. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…

Arbitration

Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 – Section 19 – High Court’s power of revision – Revision Application to the High Court shall be maintainable only against the award passed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal – Rejecting the reference petition as not maintainable.

Dec 11, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M.P. HOUSING AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. K.P. DWIVEDI — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…

Arbitration

A and C Act, 1996 – Ss 33, 34 and 37 – Only in a case of arithmetical and/or clerical error, the award can be modified and such errors only can be corrected -Order passed by the learned arbitrator in the application under Section 33 of the 1996 Act is beyond the scope and ambit of Section 33 of the 1996 Act – Therefore, both, the City Civil Court as well as the High Court have committed a grave error in dismissing the arbitration suit/appeal under Sections 34 and 37

Nov 22, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GYAN PRAKASH ARYA — Appellant Vs. M/S TITAN INDUSTRIES LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 34 and 37 – General Conditions of Contract – Clause 16(2) – Pendente lite and future interest – – held that in view of specific bar contained in clause 16(2) of the GCC, the contractor shall not be entitled to any interest pendente lite or future interest on the amounts due and payable to it under the contract.

Nov 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. MANRAJ ENTERPRISES — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 6592…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 18, 19, 24, 25, 29A, 34 and 37 – Appointment of arbitrator for adjudication of disputes – A pragmatic and common-sense approach would invariably check any discord between the desire for expeditious disposal and adequacy of opportunity to establish one’s case – In the context of the present case, This Court agree with the High Court that there was unnecessary haste and hurry by the arbitrator, especially when the respondent had filed the affidavit by way of evidence

Nov 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. NARINDER SINGH AND SONS — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH DIVISIONAL SUPERINTENDENT ENGINEER – II, NORTHERN RAILWAY, FEROZEPUR DIVISION, FEROZEPUR — Respondent…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 34 and 37 – Arbitration Appeal – Jurisdiction of High Court – Jurisdiction in a first appeal arising out of a decree in a civil suit is distinct from the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 37 of the 1996 Act arising from the disposal of a petition challenging an arbitral award under Section 34 of the 1996 Act

Nov 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PUNJAB STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. M/S RAMESH KUMAR AND COMPANY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr.…

You missed

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 5, 34, and 37 — Scope of Judicial Intervention — Minimum intervention of judicial authority in domestic arbitration matters is required under Section 5 — Challenge to an arbitral award under Section 34 is limited to specific grounds, including patent illegality or conflict with the public policy of India — Scope of interference by the Appellate Court under Section 37 is akin to and cannot travel beyond the restrictions laid down under Section 34 — Appellate Court cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award or re-interpret contractual clauses if the interpretation by the Arbitral Tribunal was a plausible view and upheld under Section 34 — Setting aside an arbitral award under Section 37, which was upheld under Section 34, based on providing a different interpretation of contractual clauses is unsustainable in law. (Paras 24, 25, 30, 31, 36, 37, 39, 50, 51)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 54 — Suit for specific performance — Commencement of limitation period — Where the defendant subsequently executed an affidavit ratifying the agreement to sell and conveying no-objection to the transfer, the period of limitation commences from the date of the admitted affidavit, as this is the stage at which the executant finally refused to execute the sale deed to the extent of her share — Trial court and High Court erred in dismissing the suit on the ground of limitation calculated from an earlier disputed date. (Paras 13, 35, 36, 37)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw
Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9(2) read with Rule 9(4) of 2001 Rules — Setting aside High Court judgment — High Court erroneously treated the date of filing of the Section 11 petition (28.06.2024) as the commencement date, leading to the conclusion that proceedings commenced beyond the statutory period — Where the arbitration notice was served (on 11.04.2024) well within the 90-day period from the ad-interim injunction order (17.02.2024), proceedings commenced in time as per Section 21 — High Court’s finding unsustainable, resulting in the restoration of the Trial Court’s initial ad-interim injunction order. (Paras 28, 31, 32) E. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Interim injunction — Dispute regarding existence

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw
Corporate

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 2(28) — Definition of “motor vehicle” — Components — Definition has two parts: an inclusive part (mechanically propelled vehicle adapted for use upon roads) and an exclusive part — The second part expressly excludes “a vehicle of a special type adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises” — Although Dumpers, Loaders, etc., may fall under the first part of the definition, they are excluded if their nature of use is confined to factory or enclosed premises, being special type vehicles/Construction Equipment Vehicles. (Paras 36, 37, 38, 39)

Jan 11, 2026 sclaw