Court has minimal scope of interference under Section 34 of A&C Act where tribunal’s award based on findings of fact
Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of A.K. Chawla and S. Ravindra Bhat, JJ. ruled that Single Judge of the High Court
Arbitrator
Arbitrator’s finding not completely immune from judicial scrutiny; arbitration award set aside
Jharkhand High Court: An arbitration appeal was filed before a Single Judge Bench comprising of Shree Chandrashekhar, J., under Section 37(1)(b) of
Disputes arising out of an agreement containing arbitration clause, must be settled through arbitration
Karnataka High Court: A Single judge bench comprising of Dinesh Maheshwari, J. while hearing a petition praying for the appointment of an
Arbitrator is not under an obligation to frame issues before adjudication; may do so for the sake of crystallizing the dispute
Jammu & Kashmir High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Sindhu Sharma, Dhiraj Singh Thakur, JJ., allowed an LPA filed against the
Claimant not to suffer for non-appearance of respondent; arbitrator’s award dismissing FCI’s claim set aside for “cryptic-reasoning”: Delhi HC
Delhi High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Pratibha M. Singh, J., allowed a petition filed by the Food Corporation of
Order 27 Rule 5 CPC mandates the Court to ensure disputes concerning public undertakings are resolved amicably; Arbitrator appointed therefor: SC
Supreme Court: A Bench comprising of A.M. Sapre and S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ. disposed of an appeal filed against the judgment of
Arbitrator appointed in light of undisputed Arbitration Agreement between the parties
Calcutta High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Ashis Kumar Chakraborty. J. decided an arbitration petition, wherein the arbitrator was appointed
Appointment of Superintending Engineer as an arbitrator untenable in light of Section 12(5) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act
Himachal Pradesh High Court: A petition filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was allowed by a Single
Grounds not urged in an appeal against arbitral award may not be raised in second appeal
Delhi High Court: A Division Bench comprising of G.S Sistani and V Kameswar Rao, JJ., dismissed an appeal under Section 37 of
Mandate of Arbitrator to be terminated if there is undue delay in dispute resolution process
Madhya Pradesh High Court: In three separate writ petitions, the termination of the mandate of the Arbitrator and the appointment of a
Arbitrator doesn’t have the power to lift the corporate veil, so as to bind non-signatory party to arbitration agreement
Delhi High Court: A Single Bench of Vibhu Bhakhru,J. Held that an arbitrator will not have the power to lift the corporate