Arbitration Archives - Page 28 of 31 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

Arbitrator–Award–Challenge to–High Court had original no jurisdiction to hear the appeal as in terms of Sub-section (2) of Section 37 of the 1996 Act.

Apr 15, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1752 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dalveer Bhandari Civil Appeal No. 4780 of…

Arbitration

Arbitrator—Appointment of—Firstly Arbitrator has to decide existence of arbitration agreement and claim comes within purview of agreement—However, these two aspects are not to be treated as preliminary issue.

Apr 14, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1679 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan Civil Appeal No. 2133 of…

Arbitration

Arbitrator—Appointment of—Not permissible to appoint an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes, in the absence of an arbitration agreement or mutual consent—Section 89 CPC has no application.

Apr 14, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1633 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.K. Sema The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.V. Raveendran Civil Appeal No. 4467 of…

Arbitration

Arbitration—Appointment—Contract stipulates formation of arbitration board—Order of appointment of retired Chief Justice of High Court as sole arbitrator, set aside.

Apr 14, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1603 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P.K. Balasubramanyan Civil Appeal No. 1945 of…

Arbitration

Arbitrator–Award–A deliberate departure from contract amounts to not only manifest disregard of his authority or a misconduct on his part, but it may tantamount to a mala fide action.

Apr 13, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1572 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.K. Jain Civil Appeal No. 1874 of 2007…

Arbitration

Arbitrator–Jurisdiction of–An arbitrator derives his authority from the contract and if he acts in disregard of the contract, he acts without jurisdiction.

Apr 10, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1360 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice D.K. Jain Civil Appeal No. 1874 of…

Arbitration

Arbitration Act, 1940 – Section 14(2) – Deemed notice – Application for setting aside award – Counsel filing award at the instance of arbitrator, a third party and did not Act as representative of appellant – Filing of award cannot be construed as notice under Section 14(2) of the Act

Apr 9, 2017 sclaw

AIR 2007 SC 327 : (2006) 4 ARBLR 171 : (2006) 134 CompCas 712 : (2006) 10 JT 238 : (2006) 12 SCALE 211 : (2007) 2 SCC 382…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 11 – Appointment of arbitrator – Dispute relating to delay in commencement of work

Apr 9, 2017 sclaw

AIR 2007 SC 285 : (2006) 4 ARBLR 236 : (2007) 1 CompLJ 126 : (2007) 3 CTC 412 : (2006) 12 SCALE 144 : (2006) 13 SCC 240…

Arbitration

Arbitrator—Appointment of—Limitation of 30 days–Cannot be invoked under sub-section (6) of Section 11 of the Act. Arbitrator—Appointment of—Other than nominated in agreement on ground that arbitrator may not be impartial or independent in taking decision—Request not maintainable.

Apr 9, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1332 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.K. Mathur The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee Civil Appeal No. 1783 of…

Arbitration

Award—When the Arbitrator had taken a plausible view on interpretation of contract, it is not open to the court to set aside the award on the ground that the Arbitrator had misconducted himself in the proceedings.

Apr 9, 2017 sclaw

2007(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 1171 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. A.R. Lakshmanan The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee Civil Appeal No. 1280…

Arbitrator–Award–Challenge to–High Court had original no jurisdiction to hear the appeal as in terms of Sub-section (2) of Section 37 of the 1996 Act.

Arbitrator—Appointment of—Firstly Arbitrator has to decide existence of arbitration agreement and claim comes within purview of agreement—However, these two aspects are not to be treated as preliminary issue.

Arbitrator—Appointment of—Not permissible to appoint an Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes, in the absence of an arbitration agreement or mutual consent—Section 89 CPC has no application.

Arbitration—Appointment—Contract stipulates formation of arbitration board—Order of appointment of retired Chief Justice of High Court as sole arbitrator, set aside.

Arbitrator–Award–A deliberate departure from contract amounts to not only manifest disregard of his authority or a misconduct on his part, but it may tantamount to a mala fide action.

Arbitrator–Jurisdiction of–An arbitrator derives his authority from the contract and if he acts in disregard of the contract, he acts without jurisdiction.

Arbitration Act, 1940 – Section 14(2) – Deemed notice – Application for setting aside award – Counsel filing award at the instance of arbitrator, a third party and did not Act as representative of appellant – Filing of award cannot be construed as notice under Section 14(2) of the Act

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 11 – Appointment of arbitrator – Dispute relating to delay in commencement of work

Arbitrator—Appointment of—Limitation of 30 days–Cannot be invoked under sub-section (6) of Section 11 of the Act. Arbitrator—Appointment of—Other than nominated in agreement on ground that arbitrator may not be impartial or independent in taking decision—Request not maintainable.

Award—When the Arbitrator had taken a plausible view on interpretation of contract, it is not open to the court to set aside the award on the ground that the Arbitrator had misconducted himself in the proceedings.

You missed

Developer liable for refund with agreed interest for delayed possession; interest on allottee’s loan not developer’s direct liability, though loan financing can be a factor in awarding general compensation

Demand notices for misdeclaration of goods under Section 66 of the Railways Act, 1989 are valid even if raised after delivery of goods, unlike punitive charges for overloading which must be recovered before delivery.

High Court’s power under Section 482 CrPC is limited to determining a prima facie case from the FIR, without appreciating defence evidence or conducting a mini-trial.

Supreme Court of India Judgements

Category: Arbitration

You missed