Arbitration Archives - Page 17 of 30 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

April 20, 2025 1:14 pm

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 34 and 37 – Arbitration proceedings – Termination of contract – Once it is held that the termination was illegal and thereafter when the learned Arbitral Tribunal has considered the claims on merits, which basically were with respect to the unpaid amount in respect of the work executed under the contract and loss of profit. Cogent reasons have been given by the learned Arbitral Tribunal – Cogent award

Oct 19, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M/S HSS INTEGRATED SDN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra and M.…

Arbitration

Arbitration—Award—Stay of Execution—Mere filing of an objection under S.34 of the Act by a Government shall not render the award unenforceable

Oct 13, 2019 sclaw

2019(3) Law Herald (SC) 2191 : 2019 LawHeraid.Org 1350 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. F. Nariman Hon*ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran Civil…

Arbitration

Arbitration—Interest on Award—Provisions of Arbitration Act, 1940 including the State amendment will have no application to the proceedings commenced after coming into force of the Act of 1996

Oct 13, 2019 sclaw

2019(3) Law Herald (SC) 2184 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 1348 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Abdul Nazeer Hon’ble Mr. Justice…

Arbitration

Arbitrator—Appointment of—Enquiry by the Court must confine itself to the examination of existence of an arbitration agreement—No more and no less Arbitration Agreement—Non-signatory to Agreement—Cannot be made party to proceedings merely because it being constituent to group of companies to which one of the company of group is signatory

Oct 13, 2019 sclaw

2019(3) Law Herald |SC) 2110 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 1336 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.M. Khanwiikar Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Petition for Arbitration (Civil)…

Arbitration

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Order 7 Rule 10 and 10A – Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 34 – Setting aside arbitral award – Period of limitation –

Oct 4, 2019 sclaw

In such circumstance, in the fact situation wherein the issue of delay had arisen only in the context of the delay of 8 days in re-presentation as permitted by the…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 34, 34(2), 34(5) and 34(6) – Permission to adduce evidence – The proceedings under Section 34 of the Act are summary proceedings and not a regular suit. When the order of the District Judge dismissing the application filed by respondent Nos.1 and 2 does not suffer from perversity, the High Court, HC cannot interfere .

Sep 30, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. CANARA NIDHI LIMITED — Appellant Vs. M. SHASHIKALA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Civil…

Arbitration

Arbitration—Termination of Mandate—Merely because Tribunal has not fixed its fee as per settled law their mandate is not liable to be dismissed.

Sep 15, 2019 sclaw

2019(3) Law Herald (SC) 1961 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 1243 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. F. Nariman Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant Civil Appeal No.…

Arbitration

Appointment of arbitrator – Appellant’s own default in sleeping over his right for 14 years will not constitute a case of ‘undue hardship’ justifying extension of time under Section 43(3) of the 1996 Act or show ‘sufficient cause’ for condonation of delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act . Held High Court’s observation that the entire dispute seems concocted so as to pursue a monetary claim against the respondents approved.

Sep 8, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M/S GEO MILLER & CO. PVT. LTD. — Appellant Vs. CHAIRMAN, RAJASTHAN VIDYUT UTPADAN NIGAM LTD. — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, Mohan…

Arbitration

Arbitrator—Appointment of—Jurisdiction—In domestic arbitration when parties have specifically agreed upon venue of arbitration then High Court under whose jurisdiction said venue falls would have exclusive jurisdiction to exercise the powers under S.ll of the Act

Aug 24, 2019 sclaw

2019(3) Law Herald (SC) 1871 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 1231 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Honble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.S. Bopanna Civil Appeal No. 5850…

Arbitration

A non-signatory can be bound by Arbitration Agreement on the basis of “Group of Companies” doctrine, Supreme Court

Aug 9, 2019 sclaw

A non-signatory can be bound by Arbitration Agreementon the basis of “Group of Companies” doctrine, Supreme Court Murali Krishnan August 9 2019 FacebookTwitterWhatsAppShare24 The Supreme Court yesterday ruled that a non-signatory can be bound by an…

You missed

I P C

Defamation — Imputation in Good Faith for Protection of Interests — Exception 9 to S. 499 IPC engrafts the principle of qualified privilege, stating it is not defamation to make an imputation on the character of another, provided it is made in good faith for the protection of the interest of the person making it, or of any other person, or for the public good

Apr 20, 2025 sclaw

Corporate

ESI – The definition of ‘principal employer’ under Section 2(17) is wide and includes not only the owner or occupier of a factory (or head of department in government establishments) but also the managing agent or any person responsible for the supervision and control of the establishment — Designation is immaterial if the person functions as a managing agent or supervises/controls the establishment

Apr 20, 2025 sclaw

Anticipatory Bail

Habitual Offender/Criminal Antecedents — Consideration of Nature of Current Offence — While the criminal antecedents and alleged status of an accused as a habitual offender are extremely relevant factors that ordinarily weigh against the grant of anticipatory bail, the High Court’s discretion in granting such bail may not warrant interference

Apr 20, 2025 sclaw

Circumstantial Evidence I P C

Murder (Filicide) vs. Suicide — In cases based on circumstantial evidence where the question is whether the death was homicidal (filicide) or suicidal, the prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances that points exclusively to the guilt of the accused and is inconsistent with any hypothesis of innocence

Apr 20, 2025 sclaw

Category: Arbitration

You missed