Dispute Resolution / Arbitration

The Supreme Court by way of a landmark judgment in Gayatri Balasamy v. ISG Novasoft Technologies Limited, dealt with the issue of whether courts have the power to modify an arbitral award under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Arbitration Act"). ......

On February 20, 2025, the Supreme Court of India ("Supreme Court") reserved its judgement on whether the powers of a court under Section 34 and Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Act") extend to the modification of arbitral awards. The Supreme Court, while analysing precedents relating to these Sections, observed that some judgements have emphasized the lack of the courts. ... ...

The Delhi High Court ("Court") recently set aside an arbitration award that granted damages without proof of loss or injury, on the ground of patent illegality under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1999 ("Arbitration Act") in Indian Oil Corporation Limited vs. M/s Fiberfill Engineers Limited . ... ...

In recent years, arbitration has become one of the most popular methods of resolving commercial disputes. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Act") lays down the framework for arbitration proceedings in India, enabling parties to settle disputes out of court. In this blog post, we will examine the recent judgement by the Delhi High Court in Unthinkable Solutions LLP v. Ejohri Jewels Hub Pvt. Ltd , which highlights the importance of specific reference while incorporating and enforcing an arbitration clause from another contract. ......

The recent judgment by the Supreme Court's ("Court") constitutional bench in Central Organisation for Railway Electrification v. M/s ECI SPIC SMO MCML (JV) brings in a fresh vision for Indian arbitration law. The landmark judgment delivered by a five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud addresses. ......

Subsequent to the Supreme Court's judgment in the case of Cox & Kings Ltd. v. SAP India Pvt. Ltd (discussed here) pertaining to the 'Group of Companies' doctrine, the Delhi High Court ("Court"), in the case of Vingro Developers Pvt. Ltd. v. Nitya Shree Developers Pvt. Ltd. ("Vingro Case"), has opined on the applicability of the group of companies doctrine to the directors of a company and adding directors as a party to arbitration. ......

The High Court of Delhi, in the case of Smaash Leisure Ltd. vs. Ambience Comemrcial Developers Private Limited has held that a statement made by a party's counsel before the Arbitrator withdrawing objection to unilateral appointment would not suffice the requirement of 'express agreement' under Section 12 (5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Act"). ......

A seven judge bench of the Supreme Court was called upon to resolve an issue which arose in the context of three statutes – the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Arbitration Act"), the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 ("Stamp Act"), and the Indian Contract Act, 1872 ("Contract Act") - whether arbitration agreements would be non-existent, unenforceable, or invalid if the underlying contract is not stamped. ......