Arbitral Tribunal's Mandate Not Automatically Terminated After Deadline: J&K & Ladakh High Court

The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has reiterated that an arbitral tribunal does not permanently lose its authority merely because the deadline to pass an award has expired, holding that proceedings can continue if the Court later extends the time. A Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in Rohan Builders (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Berger Paints India Ltd. observed: "it is clear that expiry of stipulated time period for making award only makes the Arbitral...

Challenge To Impleadment Of Non-Signatory In Arbitration Maintainable Only After Award: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that where an arbitral tribunal rejects a jurisdictional objection, including to the impleadment of a non-signatory, the challenge to such a decision can be raised only after the tribunal proceeds with the arbitration and makes an award. On this basis, the court dismissed as not maintainable an appeal filed by Ocean View Properties LLP against an order of the arbitral tribunal impleading it as a party to the proceedings, even though it was not a signatory to...

Limitation Need Not Be Examined By HC At Arbitrator Appointment Stage: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court at Lucknow has held that while appointing an arbitrator, it is not required to examine whether the claim is barred by limitation. It clarified that such issues can be decided by the arbitral tribunal while exercising jurisdiction under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The question before the bench of Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Abhdesh Kumar Chaudhary was: “Whether the High Court before appointing the arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the...

MP High Court Upholds Remand To Arbitrator In NHAI Land Compensation Case After He Ignored Land's Urban Status

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has upheld a district court's decision to send a land compensation dispute back to an arbitrator after finding that the arbitrator ignored that the land had already been declared urban before fixing compensation. “The power of remand as held by the constitution bench permits the Court to send the award to the Tribunal for reconsideration of specific aspects and it is not an open ended process rather it is a limited power confined to limited circumstances and issues...

Amazon- Future Coupons Reach Settlement; Delhi High Court Disposes Challenge To SIAC Award

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday permitted withdrawal of petitions filed by Future Coupons Private Limited and promoter entities, including Ashni Kishore Biyani, against a Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) award in their dispute with Amazon. The award had held them in breach of contractual obligations and directed them to pay Rs 23.7 crore in damages, along with Rs 77.3 crore and SGD 68,550 towards costs, but the challenge was withdrawn after the parties entered into a settlement...

Bombay HC Restores Interim Relief Pleas Against AAI, Says Interim Relief Court Must Examine Arbitrability Bar

The Bombay High Court has held that, in a case involving airport premises, the question of whether a dispute can be referred to arbitration requires examination by the court hearing interim relief petitions under the Arbitration Act, especially where a law may bar arbitration. The court made this observation while restoring petitions filed by licensees against the Airports Authority of India (AAI) seeking interim protection against termination of their licence agreements and eviction from...

Arbitral Tribunal Can Decide Limitation Even After Appointment Under Section 11: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 27 April held that even where a Court appoints an Arbitral Tribunal under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 without examining limitation, the Arbitral Tribunal can still decide such objections under Section 16. A Bench of Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Abdesh Kumar Chaudhary held that Arbitral Tribunals retain full authority to decide their own jurisdiction, including limitation, even after a Section 11 reference, and set aside the Tribunal's...

Arbitrator Need Not Frame Issue Absent Relief Claim In Statement of Claim: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on 7 April held that an Arbitral Tribunal is not required to frame a specific issue where a party merely raises a grievance in the Statement of Claim (SoC) without seeking any corresponding relief. A Single Judge Bench of Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh upheld an award in a dispute between the Ministry of Railways and Ambuj Hotel and Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., and dismissed cross-petitions under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. She observed: “There was...

Delhi High Court Restrains AAI From Encashing ₹3.17 Cr Bank Guarantees In Jabalpur Airport Upgradation Dispute

The Delhi High Court has recently restrained the Airport Authority of India from taking any further precipitative or coercive action against NKG Infrastructure Ltd. in relation to bank guarantees aggregating to Rs. 3.17 crore furnished for the Jabalpur Airport upgradation project, noting that the disputes are already under consideration before a Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC). It clarified that the present order will not apply to two bank guarantees that have already been processed for...

Delhi HC Upholds Award, Says ACC Must Pay Over ₹10 Crore To Engineering Projects For Mining Project Defaults

The Delhi High Court has upheld an arbitral award holding a subcontractor liable to pay over Rs.10 crore to the main contractor under a back-to-back contract for losses caused by its own poor performance.Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar said: “The recovery of a proportionate share of those penalties from ACC, as the party whose underperformance caused the termination, is a straightforward application of the contractual framework and of the back-to-back principle that governed the parties...

Bombay High Court Upholds UPL Insurance Award, Holds Dispute Is Of 'Quantum' Not 'Liability'

On 22 April, the Bombay High Court held that it would not interfere under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 where an arbitral tribunal adopts a plausible view that a dispute concerns “quantum” rather than “liability”, and upholds an arbitral award arising from an insurance claim under an Industrial All Risk Policy. Justice Sandeep V. Marne dismissed the petition filed by United India Insurance Company Ltd and upheld the arbitral award in favour of UPL Ltd. He observed: ...

Limitation No Ground To Refuse Arbitration Reference Unless Claim Is Clearly Time- Barred: J&K&L High Court

The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has reiterated that a plea of limitation cannot by itself block the appointment of an arbitrator unless the claim is clearly time-barred, and that such questions should ordinarily be left to the arbitral tribunal. A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar relying on earlier precedents held,“at the time of considering a petition under Section 11(6) of the Act, unless it is shown that the claim is ex facie time barred or hopelessly time barred, the Court...