Arbitration Archives - Page 4 of 35 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

June 9, 2026 2:36 am

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6) — Appointment of Arbitrator — Power of High Court to Review/Recall – Scope of Judicial Intervention — An order passed under Section 11 appointing an arbitrator is judicial in nature, but the High Court’s review jurisdiction over such an order is highly circumscribed and must be limited to correcting a patent or procedural error; it cannot be exercised to revisit findings of law or re-interpret the arbitration agreement based on a subsequent judgment. (Paras 11.7, 11.12, 11.15)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1365 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HINDUSTAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LTD. THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY YOGESH DALAL Vs. BIHAR RAJYA PUL NIRMAN NIGAM LIMITED AND OTHERS ( Before…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Execution of Arbitral Award — Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) — Maintainability — Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 — Order 21 Rule 22 — Execution proceedings against legal representatives — The Act is a self-contained code restricting judicial interference — An order passed by a Single Judge in the course of executing an arbitral award is traceable to the Act, not the CPC; therefore, a Letters Patent Appeal against such an order is not maintainable — Where execution is sought against entities/persons arrayed as executors/legal representatives of the deceased judgment debtor, they step into the shoes of the judgment debtor for limited execution purposes and cannot be treated as third parties to the arbitral award for the purpose of challenging maintainability of the appeal under the Act.

Nov 23, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1334 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHARAT KANTILAL DALAL (DEAD) THROUGH LR. Vs. CHETAN SURENDRA DALAL AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe, JJ.…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 11(6), Section 11(12)(a), Section 2(1)(f), Section 2(2) — Applicability of Part I, including Section 11, to International Commercial Arbitration (ICA) — Dispute arising from a Buyer and Seller Agreement (BSA) where Respondent No. 1 is foreign company (incorporated in Benin) — BSA stipulates arbitration “will take place in Benin” and is governed by laws of Benin — Held: Dispute is an ICA under Section 2(1)(f) — Under Section 2(2), Part I of the Act applies only where the place of arbitration is in India — Designation of Benin as the place of arbitration, coupled with choice of Benin law as governing/curial law, unequivocally establishes Benin as the juridical seat — Indian Courts lack jurisdiction under Section 11 to appoint an arbitrator for a foreign-seated arbitration — Petition seeking appointment of an arbitrator in India is fundamentally misconceived and legally untenable.

Nov 23, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1342 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BALAJI STEEL TRADE Vs. FLUDOR BENIN S.A. AND OTHERS ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ. )…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 37 read with Section 34 — Scope of Interference — Concurrent Findings — Statutory prohibition against re-appreciation of evidence — Challenges to arbitral award upholding 24% interest rate based on loan agreement terms dismissed by Single Judge and Division Bench; Supreme Court upholds affirmation — Re-appreciation of evidence on genuineness of loan agreements or terms, including interest rate, is prohibited under Section 34(2A) proviso, particularly when Arbitrator’s findings are concurrently upheld.

Nov 22, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1327 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SRI LAKSHMI HOTEL PVT. LIMITED AND ANOTHER Vs. SRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE LTD. AND ANOTHER ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and…

Arbitration C P C

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Execution of Arbitral Award — Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) — Maintainability — Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 — Order 21 Rule 22 — Execution proceedings against legal representatives — The Act is a self-contained code restricting judicial interference — An order passed by a Single Judge in the course of executing an arbitral award is traceable to the Act, not the CPC; therefore, a Letters Patent Appeal against such an order is not maintainable — Where execution is sought against entities/persons arrayed as executors/legal representatives of the deceased judgment debtor, they step into the shoes of the judgment debtor for limited execution purposes and cannot be treated as third parties to the arbitral award for the purpose of challenging maintainability of the appeal under the Act.

Nov 22, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1334 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHARAT KANTILAL DALAL (DEAD) THROUGH LR. Vs. CHETAN SURENDRA DALAL AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe, JJ.…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 34 — Setting aside of arbitral award — Delay in pronouncement — While undue and unexplained delay in pronouncing an arbitral award is not a ground, in itself, to set it aside, it can lead to the award being vitiated if the delay adversely affects the final decision and reflects on the findings, making it conflict with public policy or be patently illegal.

Nov 2, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1277 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 2 JUDGES BENCH M/S. LANCOR HOLDINGS LIMITED Vs. PREM KUMAR MENON AND OTHERS ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ.…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 34 and 37 — Setting aside of arbitral award — Scope of interference — Courts are prohibited from rewriting contracts and should not interfere with arbitral awards unless grounds under Section 34 are met, such as violation of public policy or patent illegality. Interference is justified when an award shocks the conscience or is contrary to basic notions of justice. The scope of appeal under Section 37 is narrower than Section 34.

Oct 2, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1171 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SEPCO ELECTRIC POWER CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION Vs. GMR KAMALANGA ENERGY LTD. ( Before : B. R. Gavai, CJI. and Augustine George Masih,…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 45 — Reference to arbitration — Existence of arbitration agreement — Contract not signed by one party — Parties acted upon the contract, including lifting goods and issuing Letters of Credit — Emails confirming terms and modifications — Held, agreement to arbitrate is inferred from conduct and electronic communications, even without signatures — Mere failure to sign does not invalidate the arbitration agreement if parties’ conduct demonstrates acceptance of terms.

Sep 2, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 1036 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GLENCORE INTERNATIONAL AG Vs. M/S. SHREE GANESH METALS AND ANOTHER ( Before : Sanjay Kumar and Satish Chandra Sharma, JJ. )…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 47 and 49 — Enforcement of Foreign Award — High Court found no grounds to refuse recognition of the award and held it enforceable, subject to RBI approval — Supreme Court agreed with this conclusion and directed execution proceedings to proceed.

Aug 31, 2025 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GPE (INDIA) LTD AND OTHERS Vs. TWARIT CONSULTANCY SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ. ) Petition(s)…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 vs. Madhya Pradesh Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 — Works Contract — Concession Agreement for development of State Highway falls under ‘works contract’ as defined in MP Act, 1983 — MP Act, 1983 has overriding effect on Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for such contracts — Private arbitration under 1996 Act is inoperative and void ab initio where MP Act, 1983 mandates adjudication by Madhya Pradesh Arbitration Tribunal.

Aug 1, 2025 sclaw

2025 INSC 907 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UMRI POOPH PRATAPPUR (UPP) TOLLWAYS PVT. LTD. Vs. M.P. ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND ANOTHER ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and R.…

You missed

C P C

Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 — Section 8(3) — Unauthorized alienation of minor’s property — Such alienation is voidable, not void ab initio, and can be challenged by the minor upon attaining majority or by someone claiming under the minor.

Jun 8, 2026 sclaw

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure — Delay in Investigation and Filing of Charge Sheet — Speedy Trial — Right to Speedy Trial and Timely Completion of Investigation are integral parts of Article 21 of the Constitution — Statutory recognition in CrPC for prompt investigation — Investigations should be completed within a reasonable time, not endlessly — Lack of strict timelines in CrPC does not permit indefinite investigations — Inordinate delay without adequate justification warrants intervention by Courts.

Jun 8, 2026 sclaw

Contract Act Mining

Contract Law — Statutory Amendment — Impact on existing contracts — Where a statutory amendment alters a fundamental aspect like royalty rates, a pre-existing contract cannot prevent the application of the amended law, especially when the payment of royalty is linked to the removal or consumption of minerals — [MMDR Act] Applicability of S.9 — Scope — Section 9 applies broadly to all entities engaged in removal/dispatch of minerals, not only direct mining lessees.

Jun 8, 2026 sclaw

Cr P C

Criminal Procedure — Passport — Return/Surrender of Passport — Accused facing serious criminal charges — Right to travel abroad vis-à-vis right to speedy trial — Balance between individual liberty and societal interest — Accused charged with abetment of suicide and criminal conspiracy since 2014, trial still at stage of committal despite lapse of over ten years — Accused, a US citizen, had misused interim protection in prior proceedings to leave the country without Court’s leave — Whether High Court justified in permitting accused to travel abroad on grounds of medical treatment — Held, not justified — High Court indulgent rather than judicially restrained — Medical facilities in India comparable to those abroad — High Court’s revisional order set aside — Accused restrained from travelling abroad without express permission of Sessions Court — Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, S. 442 — Constitution of India, Art. 21

Jun 8, 2026 sclaw

Category: Arbitration

You missed