Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Category: Arbitration

Arbitration

Appointment of arbitrator – Section 11 court would refer the matter when contentions relating to non-arbitrability are plainly arguable, or when facts are contested – The court cannot, at this stage, enter into a mini trial or elaborate review of the facts and law which would usurp the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal

Apr 10, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SANJIV PRAKASH — Appellant Vs. SEEMA KUKREJA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman, B.R. Gavai and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. )…

Arbitration

A & C Act – Obviously, once time has started running, any final rejection by the Appellant by its letter dated 10.11.2010 would not give any fresh start to a limitation period which has already begun running, following the mandate of Section 9 of the Limitation Act – This being the case, the High Court was clearly in error in stating that since the applications under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act were filed on 06.11.2013, they were within the limitation period of three years starting from 10.11.2020.

Mar 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SECUNDERABAD CANTONMENT BOARD — Appellant Vs. M/S B. RAMACHANDRAIAH AND SONS — Respondent ( Before : R.F. Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ. ) Civil…

Arbitration

A & C Act, 1996 – S 11 – Period of limitation for filing an application under Section 11 would be governed by Article 137 of the First Schedule of the Limitation Act, 1963 – Period of limitation will begin to run from the date when there is failure to appoint the arbitrator.

Mar 14, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. M/S NORTEL NETWORKS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Indu Malhotra and Ajay…

Arbitration

A deeper consideration of whether an arbitration agreement exists between the parties must be left to an Arbitrator who is to examine the documentary evidence produced before him in detail after witnesses are cross-examined on the same – This Court set aside the impugned judgment of the Delhi High Court in so far as it conclusively finds that there is an Arbitration Agreement between the parties

Mar 14, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PRAVIN ELECTRICALS PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. GALAXY INFRA AND ENGINEERING PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : R.F. Nariman, B.R. Gavai and Hrishikesh…

Arbitration

A & C Act – S 2(1)(f) would show that whatever be the transaction between the parties, if it happens to be entered into between persons, at least one of whom is either a foreign national, or habitually resident in, any country other than India; or by a body corporate which is incorporated in any country other than India; or by the Government of a foreign country, the arbitration becomes an international commercial arbitration- This being the case, it is clear that the Delhi High Court had no jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator

Mar 7, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AMWAY INDIA ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. RAVINDRANATH RAO SINDHIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : R.F. Nariman and B.R. Gavai, JJ.…

Arbitration

Presence of an arbitration clause within a contract between a state instrumentality and a private party has not acted as an absolute bar to availing remedies under Article 226 – If the state instrumentality violates its constitutional mandate under Article 14 to act fairly and reasonably, relief under the plenary powers of the Article 226 of the Constitution would lie.

Feb 24, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNITECH LIMITED AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. TELANGANA STATE INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION (TSIIC) AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 12 – Time limit for arbitral award – Appointment of the Sole Arbitrator is subject to the declarations made under Section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (as amended) Parties are directed to approach the Indian Council of Arbitration within a period of 2 weeks to fix the date of the arbitral proceedings.

Feb 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. M/S. PROGRESSIVE CONSTRUCTION LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Indu Malhotra and Ajay Rastogi, JJ. )…

Arbitration

Arb and C Act, 1996 – Ss 11 & 11(6) – Appointment – if the petitioner has any grievance with regard to the manner in which the Arbitrator has been appointed and has entered reference, the contentions could be urged before the Arbitrator by way of objection or in such other proceedings – A petition under Section 11(6) seeking appointment of the Arbitrator in this situation, is not sustainable.

Feb 7, 2021 sclaw

1/3 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH EUROBEARINGS INDIA PRIVATE. LIMITED — Appellant Vs. EUROBEARINGS R.I. — Respondent ( Before : S.A Bobde, CJI, A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ.…

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