The seat of the arbitration can be deduced from the conduct of not raising objections as to conduct of arbitration proceedings at a particular territory (Bombay High Court)

     Update by Editor

Omprakash and others v. Vijay Dwarkada Varma MANU/MH/0543/202 High Court of Bombay (Nagpur); single-judge bench, Manish Pitale J decided on 27 April 2020 A partnership deed had an arbitration clause. The partners had a dispute. One of them applied for appointment of an arbitrator and the High Court made the

Continue reading
Categories: Application for setting aside award |  Arbitral seat |  Jurisdiction |  Place of arbitration |  Section 34 |  Section 42  

Considering and allowing a time-barred claim makes the award contrary to public policy of India, and irrational, and perverse, and lacking in judicial approach

     Updates by Saurabh Tiwari

KM Suresh Babu v. Sundaram Finance Limited Madras High Court; single-judge bench, M Sundar J; 05 March 2020 A. THE BACKGROUND Sundaram Finance (SF) financed a truck to Suresh under a hire-purchase contract. Suresh defaulted on the repayment of instalments on 06 April 1999. SF seized the truck on 17

Continue reading
Categories: Fundamental policy of Indian law |  Limitation |  Patent Illegality |  Public Policy of India |  Section 34  

Award set aside by Delhi High Court in an appeal, overturning the finding of the arbitral tribunal and a single judge who had dismissed the set-aside application, on the ground that the reasoning of the tribunal was perverse and hence in conflict with the public policy of India (Delhi High Court)

     Updates by Avantika Verma

MMTC Limited v. Anglo American Metallurgical Coal, FAO (OS) 532/2015 Delhi High Court; 2-judge bench, G.S. Sistani and Anup Jairam Bhambhani JJ.; decided on 02 March 2020 A bench of two judges of the Delhi High Court set aside, in this case, a domestic award in an appeal under Section

Continue reading
Categories: Application for setting aside award |  Fundamental policy of Indian law |  Perverse award |  Public Policy of India |  Recourse against arbitral award |  Section 34  

Standard for setting aside arbitral award; permissibility of re-appreciating findings of fact in set-aside proceedings; claim for damages et. al. (Delhi High Court) (7 January 2020)

     Updates by Avantika Verma , Aimen Reshi

G+H Schallschutz  v.  Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited 2020 SCC OnLine Del 19;  single-judge bench, Sanjeev Narula, J.; Decided on 07 January 2020 The Dispute Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited (“BHEL”) signed a contract with the Public Electric Company, Yemen to construct a power plant. For manufacture of some equipments required in

Continue reading
Categories: Damages |  Interpretation of contract |  Patent Illegality |  Public policy |  Reappreciation of evidence |  Reappreciation of finding of fact |  Section 34 |  Setting aside arbitral award  

Standard of setting aside; facets of a reasoned award; power of remission et. al. (Supreme Court)

     Updates by Avantika Verma

Dyna Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Crompton Greaves Ltd., 2019 SCC OnLine SC 1656 Supreme Court of India, 3- Judge Bench, N.V. Ramana, Ajay Rastogi, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ., Decided on 18 December 2019 The Supreme Court has re-emphasised that under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“ACA”) the award must

Continue reading
Categories: Characteristics of a reasoned order |  Characteristics of reasoned order |  Duty to give reasons |  Form and contents of award |  Grounds for setting aside arbitral award |  Implied reasoning |  Perverse award |  Reasoned or speaking award |  Recourse against arbitral award |  Section 34 |  Setting aside arbitral award |  Standard for setting aside arbitral award