NV International overruled; limitation governing appeals under Section 37 ACA clarified

     Update by Editor

Government of Maharashtra v. M/s Borse Brothers Engineers & Contractors Pvt. Ltd. and connected matters  Court: Supreme Court of India | Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 995 of 2021 and two other connected matters | Citation: Currently not available | Bench: RF Nariman, BR Gavai and Hrishikesh Roy JJ |

Continue reading
Categories: Appealable orders |  Section 13 Commercial Courts Act |  Section 37 |  Section 43 |  Set aside or refusing to set aside an arbitral award |  Setting aside arbitral award  

Specific performance of a determinable contract cannot be granted nor can any injunction be issued to restrain the termination (Delhi High Court)

     Update by Amitabh Abhijit

      Inter Ads Exhibition Pvt. Ltd. v. Busworld International Cooperative Vennootschap Met Beperkte Anasprakelijkheid Court: High Court of Delhi | Case Number: FAO(OS) (COMM) 23/2020 | Citation: Not currently available | Judges: Hima Kohli and Asha Menon JJ | Date: 01 May 2020 | Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/15135917/   A 2-judge bench

Continue reading
Categories: Appealable orders |  Determinable contract |  Interim orders |  Section 37 |  Section 9 |  Termination of contract  

Which court has jurisdiction over an arbitral process clarified; BALCO’s concurrent-jurisdiction theory is not its real ratio; seat v. venue debate discussed; Hardy held to be contrary to BALCO (Supreme Court of India)

     Article by Aimen Reshi , Prashant Mishra

BGS SGS Soma JV v. NHPC Ltd., SCC OnLine SC 1585 Supreme Court, 3-judge bench, R.F Nariman, Aniruddha Bose and V Ramasubramanian, JJ., Decided on 10 December 2019 Preface–which court has jurisdiction over an arbitral process and as a result jurisdiction to set aside an award Courts in the arbitral

Continue reading
Categories: Appealable orders |  Arbitral seat |  BALCO |  Concurrent jurisdiction |  Designation of arbitral seat |  Exclusive jurisdiction |  Interpretation of judgment |  Maintainability |  Seat |  Seat of arbitration |  Set aside or refusing to set aside an arbitral award |  Tests for determination of seat |  Venue |  Venue of arbitration  

Limitation to file appeal under Section 37 from a Section 34 proceedings is a maximum of 120 days (Supreme Court of India)

     Updates by Aimen Reshi

NV International v State of Assam, 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1584 Supreme Court, 2-judge bench, Rohinton Fali Nariman and S Ravindra Bhat, JJ., decided on 6 December 2019 Background—Limitation under Section 34 and its effect on limitation under Section 37 as decided by the Supreme Court in Varindera Construction Section 37

Continue reading
Categories: Appeal |  Appealable orders |  Limitation |  Limitation Act |  Limitation under Section 37 |  Set aside or refusing to set aside an arbitral award  

High Courts can exercise jurisdiction under Article 227 in certain arbitral matters, but with extreme circumspection, considering the statutory policy of the ACA, so that interference is restricted to orders that are passed which are patently lacking in inherent jurisdiction (Supreme Court)

     Updates by Editor

Deep Industries Limited v. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation and another, 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1602 Supreme Court, 3-judge bench, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Aniruddha Bose and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ; decided on 28 November 2019 Article 227 of the Constitution of India gives the High Court the power of superintendence over

Continue reading
Categories: Appealable orders |  Article 226 |  Article 227 |  Competence of arbitral tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction |  Interim measures ordered by arbitral tribunal |  Judicial review in arbitration |  Power of superintendence over all courts by the High Court |  Self-contained code |  Special act v. general act |  Speedy disposal |  Time limit