Digital Conciliation

A legal professional in a dark suit holding a wooden gavel over an open book next to a golden scale of justice on a desk, featuring a text overlay about the Supreme Court ruling on collaborators and arbitration clauses. Elecon Engineering Company Ltd. v. Bhartiya Rail Bijlee Company Ltd. and Anr. | Civil Appeal No. 7116/2026 | Supreme Court of India | May 7, 2026 The Supreme Court has held that a Collaborator who executes a Deed of Joint Undertaking as an inextricable part of

The intersection of law and technology: Navigating modern commercial disputes The decision delivered by the Delhi High Court in Prem Lata Surekha v. Chakradhari Surekha is a significant ruling on partnership disputes, arbitral jurisdiction, evidentiary standards and the limited scope of judicial interference under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The judgment highlights how courts approach disputes arising from family partnerships where allega

Supreme Court Clarifies: Section 37 Appeal for Konkan Railway vs. Chenab Bridge Project is Not a Rehearing of Award, Outlining Judicial Limits. The appellate journey in Indian arbitration law proceeds through two levels of judicial scrutiny after an award is made. The first is a challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, heard by the principal civil court of original jurisdiction or the commercial court. The second is an appeal under Section 37

Supreme Court Upholds Strict Limits on Section 34: Absolute Ban on Rewriting Awards Reaffirmed S.V. Samudram v. State of Karnataka, (2024) 3 SCC 623[1] In a significant reinforcement of arbitral autonomy, the Supreme Court in S.V. Samudram v. State of Karnataka has categorically held that courts exercising jurisdiction under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 cannot modify arbitral awards or re-appreciate evidence. Background The case arose from

AdrEdge explores the complexities of evidentiary procedures and exceptional circumstances in legal cases, highlighting the nuances of adducing evidence at the section 34 stage. Background In Alpine Housing Development Corporation Pvt. Ltd. v. Ashok S. Dhariwal, (2023) 19 SCC 629, the Supreme Court examined a question that arises with some regularity in contested Section 34 proceedings: can a party that did not participate in the arbitration, and against whom an ex-parte award

Supreme Court Denies Arbitration in NTPC Ltd. vs. SPML Infra Ltd.: Case of Reaping Benefits and Alleging Coercion. When can a court refuse to refer parties to arbitration on the ground that there is no live dispute? The answer, in most cases, is: rarely. The law strongly favours referral. But a recent decision of the Supreme Court of India in NTPC Ltd. v. SPML Infra Ltd., decided on April 10, 2023, demonstrates that there are situations where a referral court must exercise th

Supreme Court Ruling Highlights Importance of Mediation in Legal Proceedings: "You Cannot Fake Urgency to Skip Mediation" in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Keerthi Case. In a significant ruling for the alternative dispute resolution landscape, the Supreme Court of India has made clear that plaintiffs in commercial suits cannot manufacture a prayer for urgent interim relief simply to sidestep the mandatory pre-litigation mediation requirement under Section 12A of the Commercial Cou