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...

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...

Public Announcement Under IBC Sufficient, Individual Notice Not Required: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 24 April, held that under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, individual notice to each creditor is not required and that a public announcement under Section 15 of the Code constitutes sufficient notice to corporate creditors. A Bench comprising Justices Ajit Kumar and Swarupama Chaturvedi, while allowing a petition by South East U.P. Power Transmission Company Limited (and a connected petition by Tata Steel Limited) further held that creditors must exercise...

IBC Overrides Electricity Act In Conflict, Pre-CIRP Dues Cannot Be Enforced: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 24 April, held that the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), being a later law, prevails over the Electricity Act, 2003 in case of inconsistency. The Bench of Justices Ajit Kumar and Swarupama Chaturvedi allowed the writ petition and held that Section 238 of the IBC gives the Code overriding effect over other statutes, including sector-specific laws. It held: “The legislative intent is thus to create a self-contained and comprehensive framework where all...

Arbitral Award Executable Against SPV Members Not Party To Proceedings: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 9 April held that members of a special purpose vehicle (SPV) fall within the expression “persons claiming under them” under Section 35 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and allowed arbitral awards to be executed against them even if they were not parties to the arbitration proceedings. Justice Pankaj Bhatia delivered the ruling while dismissing petitions challenging execution proceedings initiated by Adani Enterprises Ltd. against shareholders of an SPV...

Allahabad HC Flooded With Pleas Seeking Expeditious Disposal Of Section 14 SARFAESI Matters, Directs UP Govt To Issue Instructions

Observing a “flood” of petitions over delays in processing applications for assistance in taking possession of secured assets and non-compliance with earlier directions, the Allahabad High Court has cautioned that such inaction defeats the purpose of the SARFAESI Act. “Recently we have seen a flood of writ petitions before this Court in which the secured creditor or auction purchaser comes for the expeditious disposal of the application under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and further in...

Allahabad High Court Upholds Ghaziabad Property Tax Revision Based On Minimum Monthly Rent Rate

The Allahabad High Court has upheld the Ghaziabad Municipal Corporation's revision of property tax based on minimum monthly rent rates (MMRR) under the U.P. Municipal Corporations Act, 1959.In a PIL challenging the revision of property tax and its enhancement based on MMRR, the bench of Chief Justice Arun Bhansali and Justice Kshitij Shailendra held: “we neither find any error in determination of 'MMRR' based upon categorization/classification of the properties nor any illegality in the...

Demonetisation Deposits From Cash In Hand Cannot Be Rejected Without Evidence: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 8 April held that where a taxpayer explains cash deposits during 2016 Indian demonetization as arising from cash in hand, the Assessing Officer cannot reject the explanation in the absence of any material to the contrary. A Bench comprising Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Abdhesh Kumar Chaudhary dismissed the appeal filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow against Medharaj Techno Concept Pvt. Ltd. and upheld the order of the Income Tax Appellate...

NCLT Bar Body Moves Allahabad HC Against Joint Scrutiny Of Allahabad Bench Filings, Alleges Repeated Defect Objections

The Company Law Tribunal Bar Association, Prayagraj, has moved the Allahabad High Court challenging a public notice dated February 27, 2026 issued by the Registrar of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Principal Bench, which alters the scrutiny mechanism for filings before the Jaipur and Allahabad Benches. Under the impugned notice, scrutiny of matters filed before the NCLT Jaipur Bench is to be undertaken by the Jaipur registry itself, while scrutiny of matters filed before the...

Only NCLT Can Decide Premature Loan Repayment Disputes Under RBI Act: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 31 March held that under Section 45QA of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 read with Section 430 of the Companies Act, 2013, only the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has the jurisdiction to decide disputes regarding premature repayment of a loan. A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Sandeep Jain dismissed the appeal filed by Shivam Traders And Hire Purchase Pvt. Ltd. against Madhusudan Vehicles Pvt. Ltd., holding that the civil court had no jurisdiction over...

Failure To Reply To SCN Or Absence From Hearing Not Ground To Cancel GST Registration: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on 17 March held that GST registration cannot be cancelled merely because a taxpayer fails to reply to a show cause notice or appear on the date fixed for hearing, and that authorities must record reasons before taking such a drastic step. A Bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Vivek Saran set aside the cancellation of GST registration of Jubair Enterprises and granted the petitioner liberty to file a reply to the show cause notice. The judges held: “A...

After Cancellation Of GST Registration, Show Cause Notice Should Be Served Physically: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has recently held that adjudication notice ought to be served through physical mode after cancellation of GST registration, as the taxpayer cannot access the portal thereafter. A bench of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Vivek Saran held: “Once the registration is cancelled and the registered persons thus disabled from working on the Common Portal and in any case, are relieved of obligation to check the Common Portal thereafter, it is wholly natural and...