1. SC: Appointment of the arbitrators should be as per arbitration agreement, rejects HC appointment of sole arbitrator. (17 December 2019).
When the agreement specifically provides for the appointment of Arbitral Tribunal consisting of three arbitrators from out of the panel serving or retired Railway Officers, the appointment of the arbitrators should be in terms of the agreement as agreed by the parties.
2. SC: Appeal under Sec.37 of Arbitration Act cannot be accepted with delay beyond 120 days. (16th December 2019).
Supreme Court observed that delay beyond 120 days in filing appeal under sec 37 of the arbitration and conciliation is not liable to be condoned.
3. SC: Place where cause of action arises is irrelevant once the parties have chosen “seat” for Arbitration. (11 December 2019).
Supreme court held that in all the appeals by parties, proceedings were held at one place and the award were also signed at that place. It leads to the conclusion that parties have chosen at that as the seat of arbitration under section20(1) of the Arbitration Act, 1996.
4. HC refuses to condone delay in filing of petition under Section of 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.(05 December 2019).
High Court refused to condone the delay and dismissed the petition terming it as "hopelessly" as barred by limitation.
5. HC: Person cannot seek protection under Section 9, Arbitration Act, 1996 in the absence of that person being party to an Arbitration Agreement (05 december2019).
HC Bench rejected the petition under Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 as not maintainable since no arbitration agreement could be demonstrated to be in existence between the parties.
6. HC: Defence of full and final settlement of a claim will not be considered by the Court while examining the petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act (3rd December 2019).
The defence of full and final settlement of a claim will not be considered by the Court while examining the petition under Section 11(6) of the Act and same was reiterated by court in present case.
7. SC: When a clause in an agreement merely provides for settlement of disputes between the parties to the Chairman and Managing Director, it cannot be construed as an Arbitration clause. (03 December 2019).
The Supreme Court has held that when a clause in an agreement merely provides for settlement of disputes between the parties to the Chairman and Managing Director, it cannot be construed as an Arbitration clause.
8. HC: Stamp Duty mandatory in Arbitration Agreements even if Contract is for different State. (29th November 2019).
The Bombay High Court has held that even if a contract is executed outside the State of Maharashtra and the work is also carried outside the State but arbitration of any contractual dispute is to be held within the State (in this case Mumbai), stamp duty will be payable under the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958.
9. SC: Additional Evidence can be adduced only in exceptional cases in proceedings under Sec-34 Arbitration Act. (24th September 2019).
The Supreme Court of India held that proceedings under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act will not ordinarily require anything beyond the record that was before the arbitrator and only in an exceptional case, additional evidence can be permitted to be adduced.
10. HC: Arbitration Clause can be invoked even by a Non-Signatory Party (20th September 2019).
The Karnataka High Court has reiterated the position that a third party can invoke the arbitration clause in a contract against a signatory.
11. SC: Mere 'simple fraud' allegations not a ground to nullify arbitration agreement. (14th September 2019).
The Supreme Court of India has laid down a principle in one of its judgement that mere 'simple fraud' allegations, not a ground to nullify arbitration agreement.
12. SC: Application u/s 11 of Arbitration & Conciliation Act to appoint Arbitrator not Maintainable in disputes with NHAI (28th august 2019).
The power being exclusively vested with the Central Government as envisaged under sub-section (5) of Section 3G of the National Highways Act 1956, Section 11 of the Act 1996 has no application.
13. SC: Objection to existence or validity of arbitration agreement should be raised with arbitrator, no suit for declaration & injunction can be filed. (25th August 2019).
The Supreme Court has reiterated that a suit for injunction and declaration challenging the jurisdiction of arbitrator is not maintainable, and objections apropos the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement can be raised only by way of an application under Section 16 of the Act.
14. SC expounds: Demanding Pre-Deposit for invoking Arbitration process would render Arbitral Process Ineffective & Expensive. (20th March 2019).
After taking into consideration, all the reasons including this one, the apex-Court struck down clause 25 (viii) of the notice inviting the tender. According to the Court, this clause being severable from the rest of clause 25 will not affect the remaining parts of clause 25.
15. SC: It's not mandatory to serve prior notice to Opposite Party before filing Appl. under Sec 34 of Arbitration Act. (01 August 2019).
Prior Notice is only directory. Their will be no Penal Consequences for non-compliance of the Section 34 (5).
16. SC: Court can refer parties to Arbitration only with Written Consent of the Parties. (12th March 2019).
When there was no arbitration agreement between the parties, without a joint memo or a joint application of the parties, the high court ought not to have referred the parties to arbitration.
Compiled by Saloni Saini, 4th year student of University School of Law and Legal Studies, GGSIPU. She is currently interning with LatestLaws.com.
Picture Source :
