The Supreme Court of India, in a recent Judgment dated 15th February 2018 in a case Sundraram Finance Limited Vs Abdul Samad & Another as reported in (2018) SCC Online SC121 settled the divergence of legal opinion of different High Courts on the question as to Whether an award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996
Normally parties choose arbitration as the dispute resolution mechanism to resolve all their disputes arising out of or relating to a contract. In such a situation, arbitrator has unlimited scope to decide all the issues raised by the parties.
In most of the Build operate Transfer types of contracts (BOT), we normally see a chapter called conditions Precedent. These conditions precedents impose certain obligations on both the parties which are to be fulfilled or waived off for the starting of the project work by fixing the appointed date.
In our country, everyday there are many announcements about new launch of infrastructure projects on either BOT basis or Annuity basis or EPC basis etc., But most of them end up in arbitrations due to delay in completion or termination or escalation issues or violation of state support agreements etc.
In a recent Judgment delivered on 23rd January 2018 in the matter of M/S. Indian Farmers Fertilizer Co-operative Limited Vs M/S. Bhadra Products, Supreme Court of India dealt with an interesting issue
These days many foreign law firms have started recommending Foreign companies to agree on an arbitration clause proving India seated International Arbitration. Hence, the negative feeling about having an Arbitration in India is slowly changing.
In a recent Judgment, High Court of Delhi in Shree Ganesh Metals Vs Glencore International AG (2017 SCC Online Del 11435) that a mere reference of another Contract with an Arbitration clause stating that the terms of that contract would apply, is not sufficient to conclude the existence of an arbitration clause in the contract entered late.
In a recent Judgment delivered on 15th December 2017 in a matter between Macquaire Bank Limited (Singapore) and Shilpi Cable Technologies Ltd., reported as 2017 SCC Online SC 1493, Supreme Court of India reversed the Judgment of National Company Law appellate tribunal (NCLAT) and settled the law relating to the following issues arising out of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
In normal circumstances courts, do not alter any contract because parties have the supremacy to decide the provisions of a contract, however fair or unfair it may be. But many a times interpretation of arbitration clauses have been a challenge to the courts.
Arbitration is kept beyond the technical complex procedures prescribed in the Code of Civil Procedure & Evidence Act. Arbitration Procedure can be either decided by the parties jointly or by the arbitrator in consultation with parties, in case of Adhoc Arbitration.
Skip & continue
In Compliance with Indian Regulations, Kindly Review the User Acknowledgement and Disclaimer below and then Proceed.
By proceeding further and clicking on the "ACCEPT" button herein below, I acknowledge that I of my own accord wish to know more about Law Senate (LS) for my own information and use. I further acknowledge that there has been no solicitation, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever from Law Senate (LS) or any of its members to create an Attorney-Client relationship through this website. I further acknowledge having read and understood the Disclaimer below
This website (www.lawsenate.com) is a resource for informational purposes only and is intended, but not promised or guaranteed, to be correct, complete, and up-to-date. Law Senate (LS) does not warrant that the information contained on this website is accurate or complete, and hereby disclaims any and all liability to any person for any loss or damage caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions result from negligence, accident or any other cause.
Law Senate (LS) further assumes no liability for the interpretation and/or use of the information contained on this website, nor does it offer a warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. The owner/Partners of this website do not intend links from this site to other internet websites to be referrals to, endorsements of, or affiliations with the linked entities. Law Senate (LS) is not responsible for, and makes no representations or warranties about, the contents of Web sites to which links may be provided from this Web site.
This website is not intended to be a source of advertising or solicitation and the contents of the website should not be construed as legal advice. The reader should not consider this information to be an invitation for a lawyer-client relationship and should not rely on information provided herein and should always seek the advice of competent counsel licensed to practice in the reader's country/state. Transmission, receipt or use of this website does not constitute or create a lawyer-client relationship. No recipients of content from this website should act, or refrain from acting, based upon any or all of the contents of this site.
Furthermore, the owner of this website does not wish to represent anyone desiring representation based solely upon viewing this Web site or in a country/state where this website fails to comply with all laws and ethical rules of that state. Finally, the reader is warned that the use of Internet e-mail for confidential or sensitive information is susceptible to risks of lack of confidentiality associated with sending email over the Internet.