Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court also upheld the validity of the termination notice issued by the NHIDCL and refused to interfere with its actions against the construction company.
by Mohd. Suboor†
by Prerona Banerjee† and Vishal Sinha††
The limited scope of judicial scrutiny at the pre-referral stage is navigated through the test of a ‘prima facie review’
by Prashant Tripathi† and Sanjeev Singh††
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 11, 8 and 16 — Arbitrability — Accord and Satisfaction — Plea of claims being
The Constitution bench considered a question of law : whether the instrument was duly stamped or not, was not only contrary to the plain language of Section 11(6A) of the Arbitration Act, but also wholly defeated the legislative intention of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015, and puts a spoke in the wheel of conduct of the arbitration process at its very inception.
This report revisits all the riveting and paramount Supreme Court Constitution Bench cases that were delivered, reserved for judgement and heard in the month of January 2023.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 20 and 42 r/w S. 2(1)(e) — Jurisdictional seat of arbitration once fixed under S.
“Union Territory”, if “State” under Art. 131: The subject-matter of this article’s discussion is: does a “Union Territory” fall under word “State”
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — S. 33 — Power of modification of award under — Scope of: Award can be modified
A quick legal roundup to cover important stories from all High Courts in December 2022
by Chakrapani Misra, Sameer Bindra and Varshini Sunder
Cite as: 2022 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 88
by Yash Vardhan Garu and Hetvi Mehta
While exercising the power conferred by Section 11 of the Act, the Court ceases to be a Court of Record and the review or reopening of proceedings which is sought is not with respect to any power exercised by the Court under Section 11 on merits but on account of the evident factual mistake in that order.
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 Hiresh Choudhary† and Surbhi Sharma††