Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
‘The person at whose instance a Bank Guarantee has been issued by the bank is not a party to it and is merely a benefactor from whose account the payment would be realized.’
‘The autonomy conferred on the parties is not unbridled and appointment of the Arbitrator has to meet the prerequisite of his neutrality and impartiality which are the bedrock on which the foundation of arbitration rests.’
As per Clause 26.2 of the Agreement, the Chairman/Managing Director of the Board of Directors of Contractors was supposed to do the conciliation and not the committee constituted by NHIDCL.
Any third party claiming an interest in the domain name, without being bound by the INDRP, cannot allege that the award has been rendered in violation of principles of natural justice.
The Delhi High Court said that the scope of interference with arbitral awards under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has now become heavily circumscribed.
The Delhi High Court granted time to both parties to file written submissions on whether an arbitration clause in an invoice could constitute an arbitration agreement under Section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The non-disclosure of the petition under Section 9 of the A&C Act in another matter cannot be termed as a case of egregious fraud, which would disentitle the appellant from pursuing its petition under Section 9 of the A&C Act
The Arbitral Tribunal is a creature of Contract, and the Contract is the only basis on which the Learned Tribunal should adjudicate, apart from the general provisions of law and jurisprudence.
Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act is an expression of the principle “pending a litigation nothing new should be introduced”. It provides that pendente lite, neither party to the litigation, in which any right to immovable property is in question, can alienate or otherwise deal with such property so as to affect his appointment
Mere expression “place of arbitration” cannot be the basis to determine the intention of the parties that they have intended that place as the “Seat of Arbitration”
by Simran Pahwa† and Yasha Goyal††
Supreme Court: In a case where the Punjab and Haryana High Court not only set aside the judgment of the District Judge
by Priyal Parikh*
“Undoubtedly, a limited right of appeal is given under section 37 of the Arbitration Act, 1996. But it is not the province or duty of this Court to further limit such right by excluding appeals which are in fact provided for, given the language of the provision.”
Supreme Court: While settling the dispute between Anglo American Metallurgical Coal (AAMC) and MMTC Ltd, the bench of RF Nariman* and KM
“The entire approach of the Division Bench is flawed.”
Kerala High Court: R.Narayana Pisharadi J., while allowing the statutory remedy of appeal, discussed the parallel application of provisions and the Court’s