Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Category: Arbitration

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 34 – Benefit of exclusion of period during which Court is closed is available only when application for setting aside the award is filed within ‘prescribed period of limitation’ and it is not available in respect of period extendable by the Court in exercise of its discretion.

Apr 14, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHIMASHANKAR SAHAKARI SAKKARE KARKHANE NIYAMITA — Appellant Vs. WALCHANDNAGAR INDUSTRIES LIMITED (WIL) — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari, JJ. )…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 11(6) – Reference to arbitration – Jurisdiction – While exercising jurisdiction under Section 11(6) of the Act, is not expected to act mechanically merely to deliver a purported dispute raised by an applicant at the doors of the chosen arbitrator – This is a case where the High Court should have exercised the prima facie test to screen and strike down the ex-facie meritless and dishonest litigation

Apr 11, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NTPC LIMITED — Appellant Vs. M/S SPML INFRA LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI. and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ.…

Arbitration

HELD the learned Single Judge, therefore, exceeded in its jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act quashing and setting aside the well-reasoned award passed by the learned Arbitral Tribunal on rejecting Claim Nos.33 and 34, which the Division Bench of the High Court has wrongly affirmed.

Mar 19, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH INDIAN RAILWAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. M/S NATIONAL BUILDINGS CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and M.M. Sundresh,…

Arbitration

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 34 – Filing of additional evidence – Exparte award – before the arbitral tribunal, such evidence was not there and nothing was on record on the amalgamation of the plots – High Court has not committed any error in permitting the respondents to file affidavits/additional evidence in the proceedings under section 34 of the Arbitration Act.

Jan 22, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S ALPINE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. ASHOK S. DHARIWAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T.…

Arbitration

A & C act 1996 – The court at the referral stage can interfere only when it is manifest that the claims are ex facie time-barred and dead, or there is no subsisting dispute – In the context of issue of limitation period, it should be referred to the Arbitral Tribunal for decision on merits – Similar would be the position in case of disputed “no claim certificate” or defence on the plea of novation and “accord and satisfaction”

Nov 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. MEENAKSHI SOLAR POWER PVT. LTD. — Appellant Vs. M/S. ABHYUDAYA GREEN ECONOMIC ZONES PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R.…

Arbitration

Appointment of arbitrator – Share Subscription and Shareholders Agreement – High Court has refused to refer the dispute between the parties and appoint an arbitrator, proceedings at the instance of the respondent as minority shareholder for oppression and mismanagement is pending before the NCLT – HC erred.

Nov 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VGP MARINE KINGDOM PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. KAY ELLEN ARNOLD — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari, JJ.…

Arbitration

Arbitration – Death of arbitrator – Appointment of fresh arbitrator – This Court Appoint Shri Justice K. Chandru, Former Judge of Madras High Court as the Sole Arbitrator in place of Shri Ram Prakash Bajaj, Retired District Judge (now deceased), to settle the dispute between the parties.

Oct 22, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUNIL JAIN (D) THR. LRS. AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. CHANDRA KALA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari,…

Arbitration Commercial Courts

Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – S 3 – A and C Act, 1996 – Ss 2(1)(e) 9, 14 and 34 -HELD Civil Judge (Senior Division) designated as Commercial Court to decide the applications or appeals arising out of arbitration under the provisions of Act, 1996 cannot be said to be illegal and bad in law. On the contrary, the same can be said to be absolutely in consonance with Sections 3 & 10 of Act, 2015.

Oct 22, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. REGISTRAR (GENERAL), ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah…

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