Is change of counsel a sufficient cause to condone delay in filing a set-aside application? A case comment on Delhi High Court’s Chintels India Limited v. Bhayana Builders Pvt. Ltd.

     Case Comment by Gunjan Soni , Khushbu Turki

Court: Delhi High Court | Case Number: OMP (COMM) 444/2019 | Citation:  MANU/DE/1163/2020 | Judge: Jyoti Singh J | Date: 4 June 2020   Can change in counsel be a ‘sufficient cause’ to condone delay under Section 34(3) ACA? On 4 June 2020, a single-judge bench of the Delhi High Court answered in

Continue reading
Categories: Application for setting aside award |  Condonation of delay |  Limitation |  Limitation for setting aside |  Section 34 |  Section 34(3) |  Sufficient cause  

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)

     Update by Kriti

NHPC Limited v. BGS-SGS-SOMA JV Court: High Court of Delhi| Case Number: OMP(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 OF  THE LIMITATION ACT What happens to the limitation period if

Continue reading
Categories: Application for setting aside award |  Condonation of delay |  Limitation |  Limitation Act |  Limitation for setting aside |  Section 14 |  Section 34 |  Sufficient cause  

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

     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

Continue reading
Categories: Agent |  Fundamental policy of Indian law |  Liquidated damages |  Most basic notions of morality and justice |  Patent Illegality |  Public Policy of India |  Section 34 |  Setting aside arbitral award  

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)

     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

Continue reading
Categories: Damages |  Perversity |  Quantification of an award |  Reappreciation of evidence |  Recourse against arbitral award |  Review on the merits of the dispute |  Section 34  

The argument that there was a change of counsel, and new counsel took time given the complex and technical nature of the matter is not a “sufficient cause” to entertain a set-aside application filed after three-months (Delhi High Court)

     Update by Khushbu Turki

Chintels India Limited v. Bhayana Builders Pvt. Limited Court: High Court of Delhi | Case Number: OMP (COMM) 444/2019 | Citation: Currently not available | Judge: Jyoti Singh J| Date: 4 June 2020 | Available at: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/117236752/   THE MAXIMUM LIMITATION TO FILE A SET ASIDE APPLICATION IS THREE MONTHS, AND ON COURT’S DISCRETION, ANOTHER THIRTY

Continue reading
Categories: Application for setting aside award |  Condonation of delay |  Limitation |  Limitation for setting aside |  Section 34 |  Section 34(3) |  Sufficient cause