bombay high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The objection raised was on the ground that, although the applicants and respondent 2 formed a partnership to enter into the investment agreement with respondent 1, the notice invoking arbitration was issued only on behalf of the applicants and that respondent 2, despite being a partner, did not join in issuing the invocation notice.

delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

In 2001, the appellant, Director of Education under the aegis of the Directorate of Education created by the Government of NCT of Delhi, floated a tender for the implementation of the Computer Education Project (“CEP-II”) for various government/ government aided Senior Secondary Schools, and Educomp Solutions a provider of technology-based educational products and services was awarded the contract.

Supreme Court round up
Legal RoundUpSupreme Court Roundups

The festive month of November revolved around some of the major matters before the Supreme Court. The Top Court gave guidelines for streamlining adoption process and expeditious disposal of criminal cases. The roundup covers the top stories for the month along with the segment of Never Reported Judgments and Know Thy Judge.

delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“The Court failed to appreciate as to how the position, where not only does the respondent had the power to unilaterally appoint two out of the three arbitrators and compelled the petitioner to choose one of the panels of five arbitrators can be said to meet the test of ‘counter balancing’.”

delhi high court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“As per Clause 31.16 of Letter of Intent between parties, place of arbitration was Faridabad (Haryana), which will be chosen as the seat, since seat has not been separately named and there are no other contrary indicia to show that place of arbitration is not intended to be seat of arbitration.”