The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India Bench consisting of Justice Mr NV Ramana and Justice Surya Kant brought in a lot of clarity to the connection between Liquidated Damages and the concept of ‘Time is the essence of the contract’ by a very well written Judgment (written by Hon’ble Chief Justice N V Ramana) in the matter of Welspun Specialty Solutions case.
The applicability of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Limitation Act’) as applicable to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Arbitration Act’) has brought with it many complexities.
The concept of Emergency Arbitration and Emergency Arbitrator is gradually finding acceptance in the Indian Jurisprudence. While many countries have already incorporated this in their arbitral procedure and rules, India also is not behind in coming forward and acknowledging its presence in the Indian Arbitration Act.
The article provides a summary of the Judgement passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Indian in Indus Biotech Private limited v. Kotak India venture fund wherein the court has discussed that whether an Application filed under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act , 1996 be maintainable if a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy code is pending?
Prior to 2010, if a party to an international arbitration requires to get an interim order, prior to formation of the arbitral tribunal, it was left with no other option other than approaching the appropriate National Court of the Respondent or the National Court having the jurisdiction over the subject matter covered under the application for interim order.
In a recently delivered judgment of M/s Silpi Industries etc. vs. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation & Anr, the Hon’ble Apex court of our country delved into the issue as to whether the provisions of Indian Limitation ActIn a recently delivered judgment of M/s Silpi Industries etc. vs. Kerala State Road Transport Corporation & Anr, the Hon’ble Apex court of our country delved into the issue as to whether the provisions of Indian Limitation Act
Supreme Court of India while dealing with the case of Deep Industries, held that an order passed by allowing or dismissing an application filed under Section.16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 (Herein after “The Act”) cannot be challenged under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and the said order must wait for the final award and then both can be challenged under S.34 of the Act.
The Supreme court of India in its recent judgment, in the matter of PASL Wind Solutions delivered on 20th April 2021, held that two or more Indian parties can resort to a foreign seated arbitration to resolve their disputes and further held that an award that arose out of the foreign seated arbitration can be enforced in India under New York Convention on recognition and enforcement of foreign awards.
The Supreme Court of India vide its Judgment dated April 8, 2021, while disposing of an appeal arising out of an application seeking to appoint an arbitrator under section 11(5) and (6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, held that any dispute arising out of a frustrated settlement from an arbitration must go for arbitration.
Skip & continue
Disclaimer
In Compliance with Indian Regulations, Kindly Review the User Acknowledgement and Disclaimer below and then Proceed.
User Acknowledgement
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.
