Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
“The award is not required to be set aside until and unless it is vitiated by “patent illegality” appearing on the face of the record with a caveat that the award should not be set aside merely on the ground of erroneous application of law or by appreciation of evidence.”
“The Court’s jurisdiction at the pre-reference stage is only to determine the prime facie existence of an arbitration agreement and the final adjudication, even on the question of limitation, is to be left to the arbitral tribunal, being the parties’ chosen forum.”
by Justice (Retd.) Hemant Gupta*
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 8, 11 and 45 r/w Ss. 2(1)(h) and 7 — Group of Companies doctrine: Scope
In the facts of this case, there is no reference to the Circular whereby the arbitration clause has been incorporated in the contract between the parties. It is true that the policy decision in terms of the Circular is to make arbitration a mechanism for dispute resolution both in cases of existing and future contracts.
The vesting of the power for the confirmation of the nomination of arbitrators in the General Manager of the employer, runs contrary to the principle of impartiality and independence of the arbitration process.
“The notice invoking arbitration sent to the same address was reported to have been delivered, but in the Speed Post report, by which the petition was sent to the address, it is stated that no such person is available at the address.”
Supreme Court has applied the standard of a ‘grave miscarriage of justice’ in the exceptional circumstances of this case where the process of arbitration has been perverted by the arbitral tribunal to provide an undeserved windfall to DAMEPL.
by Justice Hemant Gupta (Retd.)*
Cite as: 2024 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 28
by Vasant Rajasekaran* and Harshvardhan Korada**
Cite as: 2024 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 26
Bombay High Court viewed that while awarding costs, the Tribunal considered the conduct of parties including the petitioner and, in such circumstances, held it fair and appropriate for the claimant to make a fulsome recovery of its costs.
by Vasanth Rajasekaran* and Harshvardhan Korada**
Cite as: 2024 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 24
Administrative Law — Administrative Action — Administrative or Executive Function — File notings/Internal orders: In-principle approval and file notings do not give
Bombay High Court directed MCIA to substitute the arbitrator and appoint an independent arbitrator to continue with the arbitral proceedings.
“Prima facie, Respondents 3-5 are a veritable party to the loan agreement as they are connected with the loan documents and form part of the loan transaction.”
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — S. 34: Objections to the award: Law summarised relating to Court’s power to review awards under
“If the Court reaches a clear conclusion that there is not even a vestige of doubt that the claim is non-arbitrable, it may refuse to refer the dispute to arbitration, otherwise, the rule is to refer the dispute to arbitration”.
Penal Code, 1860 — S. 302 or 304 Pt. II r/w S. 300 Exceptions 1 & 4 — Murder or culpable homicide:
“It is a well-settled law that while deciding the question of appointment of arbitrator, the Court shall not touch the merits of the case as it may cause prejudice to the case of the parties.”
“The expression ‘public policy’ is of wider amplitude and hence, where award passed by arbitral tribunal is against the terms of contract or against law of land for time being in force, such an award is against public policy of India and is liable to be set aside under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.”