The entire period from the institution of the original proceedings to the termination of the appellate proceedings, including preparation of appeal, in the wrong forum to be excluded under Section 14 Limitation Act. Preparation for re-presentation in the right forum also excluded (Delhi HC)

July 3, 2020 Update by Kriti

NHPC Limited v. BGS-SGS-SOMA JV Court: High Court of Delhi| Case Number: O.M.P(COMM) 23/2020 |Citation: MANU/DE/1247/2020 | Judge: Rekha Palli J; Date:17 June 2020 A. TIME LIMIT TO FILE AN APPLICATION FOR SETTING ASIDE AN AWARD AND SECTION 14, LIMITATION ACT What happens to the limitation period if someone in

Encashment of an unconditional and irrevocable bank guarantee cannot be injuncted except in cases of fraud of egregious nature, irretrievable injury, or special equities. Financial distress is not equal to irretrievable injury.

June 26, 2020 Update by Akshat Shukla

Suzlon Energy Limited v. Zemira Renewable Energy Limited Court: Delhi High Court | Case Number: OMP (I) COMM 340 of 2019 and connected matters | Citation: Not currently available | Judge: Jyoti Singh J| Date: | Available at: http://164.100.69.66/jupload/dhc/JIS/judgement/05-06-2020/JIS04062020OMPICOMM3402019_170034.pdf, https://indiankanoon.org/doc/5158046/ A. INVOCATION OF BANK GUARANTEE AND APPLICATION TO RESTRAIN ENCASHMENT

An award can be set aside if it shocks the conscience of the court. (Bombay High Court)

June 23, 2020 Update by Shruti Mishra

Jackie Kukubhai Shroff v. Ratnam Sudesh Iyer Court: Bombay High Court | Case Number: ARB.P. 167/2015 | Citation: Currently not available| Judge: SC Gupte J| Date: 19 May 2020 | Available at: https://www.livelaw.in/pdf_upload/pdf_upload-375326.pdf A. THE BACKGROUND Jackie and Ratnam were shareholders in Atlas. Atlas was a shareholder in MSM. Dispute arose concerning the sale

Court cannot interfere with an award in a Section 34 petition if the view taken by the arbitral tribunal is a plausible one. (Bombay High Court)

June 22, 2020 Update by Saloni Jaiman

Niko Resources Limited v. Gujrat State Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Case Number: Commercial Arbitration Petition 484 of 2017 | Citation: Currently not available| Judge AK Menon J | Court: Bombay High Court| decided on 9/06/2020| Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/142413589/ On 9 June 2020, the Bombay High Court dismissed a petition for setting aside

An arbitration clause which says disputes “may” be referred to arbitration is not a binding arbitration agreement; the pre-arbitral mechanism of discussion need not be followed when it is clear parties do not intend any settlement (Bombay High Court)

June 22, 2020 Update by Nayanikaa Shukla

Quick Heal v. NCS Computers and another Court: Bombay High Court | Case Number: Arbitration Petition No.43 of 2018| Citation: Not currently available | Judge: SK Kathawalla J | Date: 05 June 2020 | Available at: Website of Bombay High Court https://bombayhighcourt.nic.in A. THE ARBITRATION CLAUSE STATED THAT THE DISPUTE

Categories: Appointment of arbitrator | Arbitration agreement | Pre-arbitral mechanism | Pre-arbitral procedure | Section 11

National Forum for Research in Arbitration Law

The entire period from the institution of the original proceedings to the termination of the appellate proceedings, including preparation of appeal, in the wrong forum to be excluded under Section 14 Limitation Act. Preparation for re-presentation in the right forum also excluded (Delhi HC)

Encashment of an unconditional and irrevocable bank guarantee cannot be injuncted except in cases of fraud of egregious nature, irretrievable injury, or special equities. Financial distress is not equal to irretrievable injury.

An award can be set aside if it shocks the conscience of the court. (Bombay High Court)

Court cannot interfere with an award in a Section 34 petition if the view taken by the arbitral tribunal is a plausible one. (Bombay High Court)

An arbitration clause which says disputes “may” be referred to arbitration is not a binding arbitration agreement; the pre-arbitral mechanism of discussion need not be followed when it is clear parties do not intend any settlement (Bombay High Court)

Older Posts