top of page
Regulatory / Legal Trends


Incorporation of arbitration clauses by reference: A critical analysis of Hirani Developers v. Nehru Nagar Samruddhi CHS ltd.
Critical Analysis of Arbitration Clauses by Reference: Insights from Hirani Developers v. Nehru Nagar Samruddhi CHS Ltd. The Supreme Court in Hirani Developers v. Nehru Nagar Samruddhi CHS Ltd. & Ors. (2026 INSC 484) revisited an important aspect of arbitration law concerning the incorporation of arbitration clauses by reference under Section 7(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The judgment assumes significance in the context of redevelopment agreements and co


Arbitration clause in tax invoices forms valid agreement even if purchase orders are silent, rules Bombay High Court
Bombay High Court Affirms Validity of Arbitration Clauses in Tax Invoices as Binding Agreements, Regardless of Silent Purchase Orders. Hitesh Coal Traders v. Indapur Dairy and Milk Products Ltd. | Commercial Arbitration Application No. 93 of 2026 | Bombay High Court | May 5, 2026 In a significant ruling on the existence of arbitration agreements in commercial transactions, the Bombay High Court has held that an arbitration clause printed on tax invoices and delivery challans,


Arbitrator cannot award on withdrawn claims; Dressing AMR as compensation does not revive jurisdiction, holds Delhi high court
Delhi High Court Rules Arbitrator Lacks Authority on Withdrawn Claims; AMR Labeling Ineffective for Jurisdiction Restoration. Parveen Kapoor and Ors. v. Omaxe Ltd. | FAO (OS) (COMM) 50/2024 | Delhi High Court | May 4, 2026 The Delhi High Court has held that once a claim is withdrawn from arbitral proceedings, the arbitrator loses all jurisdiction over that claim. A withdrawn claim cannot be reintroduced into the arbitration, directly or indirectly, and an award granting reli


MSME rejection does not extinguish arbitration rights under contract, holds Delhi high court
Delhi High Court Rules MSME Rejection Doesn't Nullify Arbitration Rights Under Contract Newton Engineering and Chemicals Ltd. v. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. | LPA 254/2026 | Delhi High Court | April 16, 2026 The Delhi High Court has held that a contractor who approaches the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSMFC) and receives a rejection on maintainability does not thereby lose the right to invoke arbitration under the original contract. The Division


A section 37 appeal is not a rehearing of the award: Supreme court in Konkan railway corporation ltd. v. Chenab bridge project undertaking
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


The absolute bar on rewriting awards: Supreme court reaffirms strict limits on section 34 interference
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


The fee fixation principle: Arbitrators cannot unilaterally revise their remuneration
Arbitration Insight: Understanding the Fee Fixation Principle and the limitation on arbitrators from unilaterally revising their remuneration. Background In Chennai Metro Rail Limited v. Transtonnel stroy Afcons JV, (2024) 6 SCC 211, the Supreme Court was called upon to examine two related questions: first, whether a tribunal could unilaterally revise its fee after it had been fixed by agreement with all parties; and second, whether such revision, when insisted upon by the t


The death of the closed panel: Independence in arbitrator appointments after Glock Asia-Pacific
"Exploring the Shift to Independent Arbitrator Appointments After Glock Asia-Pacific: A Discussion on the End of Closed Panels" Background In Glock Asia-Pacific Ltd. v. Union of India, (2023) 8 SCC 226, the Supreme Court addressed a common feature of government contracts in India: the arbitration clause that vests one party, typically the State or a public authority, with the exclusive right to nominate the arbitrator. The Ministry of Home Affairs had contracted with Glock As


Rescuing the Expired Mandate: Supreme Court on Section 29A Extensions
Supreme Court Reviews Section 29A Extensions: Addressing Expired Mandates with Judicial Insight. Background Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 prescribes a twelve-month period from the completion of pleadings for an arbitral tribunal to deliver its award in domestic arbitrations. Parties may by consent extend this by a further six months under Section 29A(3). Beyond eighteen months, only a court can grant further time, upon sufficient cause shown. The q


The two-view rule: why courts can not rewrite your arbitration award
Understanding the Two-View Rule: Protecting Arbitration Awards from Judicial Rewrite. Background In Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. v. State of Goa, (2024) 1 SCC 479, the Supreme Court was called upon to decide whether a High Court, exercising appellate jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, could reverse findings of an arbitral tribunal merely because it preferred a different reading of the contractual terms. The dispute arose from a Power


Your arbitration clause does not apply to MSME suppliers: Supreme court in Gujarat state civil supplies corporation ltd. v. Mahakali foods pvt. ltd.
Supreme Court Ruling: Arbitration Clause Excludes MSME Suppliers in Case Between Gujarat State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. and Mahakali Foods Pvt. Ltd. Commercial contracts between large buyers and their smaller vendors routinely contain carefully drafted arbitration clauses. For years, buyers relied on these clauses to channel any payment dispute to a forum of their choosing, often to the exclusion of the statutory dispute resolution mechanism available under the Micro,


Post-award interest runs on principal and pre-award interest together: Supreme court in UHL power company ltd. v. state of Himachal Pradesh
Supreme Court Decision: Post-Award Interest on Principal and Pre-Award Interest Affirmed in UHL Power Company Ltd. v. State of Himachal Pradesh One of the more persistent debates in Indian arbitration law has been whether an arbitral tribunal can lawfully award interest on interest, and whether post-award interest must attach only to the principal sum or to the entire amount directed to be paid. The Supreme Court of India put this debate to rest in UHL Power Company Ltd. v. S


Reaping benefits and then claiming coercion: supreme court refuses arbitration in NTPC Ltd. v. SPML Infra Ltd.
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 rules: heirs of deceased arbitration parties can not bypass the arbitration act to approach High courts John v. S. Mukanchand Bothra and HUF (Died) represented by LRs and Ors.
Supreme Court Decision: Heirs of Deceased Arbitration Parties Must Adhere to Arbitration Act, Cannot Directly Approach High Courts in Case of John v. S. Mukanchand Bothra and HUF. The interface between constitutional remedies and statutory arbitration mechanisms has long been a subject of intense judicial scrutiny in Indian jurisprudence. The Supreme Court of India, in its recent pronouncement dated April 20, 2026, has once again reaffirmed the self-contained and exhaustive n


Can a lok adalat award be challenged? What the Kerala High court got right?
Exploring the Challengeability of Lok Adalat Awards: Insights from the Kerala High Court Decision If you have ever wondered how binding a Lok Adalat settlement really is and whether a dissatisfied party can simply walk up to a High Court and undo it the Kerala High Court recently gave a definitive answer. The judgment rendered by Justice Harisankar V. Menon in the writ petition titled Prasanth P. Kumar & Anr. v. State of Kerala & Ors. (Citation: 2026: KER:26747) provides prof


The Endless Reminders Trap: Why Settlement Talks Cannot Save a Time-Barred Arbitration Claim
Exploring the 'Endless Reminders Trap': How Settlement Discussions Fail to Revive Time-Barred Arbitration Claims. B and T AG v. Ministry of Defence | Supreme Court of India | Arbitration Petition No. 13 of 2023 | Decided on 18.05.2023 In a significant ruling on limitation law in arbitration, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a petition for appointment of an arbitrator filed by B and T AG, a Swiss arms manufacturer, against the Ministry of Defence. The Court held that the


One Day Late, One Case Lost: The Supreme Court on the Hard Outer Limit for Challenging Arbitral Awards
Exploring the Supreme Court's Strict Deadline for Challenging Arbitral Awards: "One Day Late, One Case Lost" - A Critical Analysis by adrEdge. Time limits in arbitration law are not mere procedural formalities. The legislature has drawn them tightly, and the Supreme Court of India has consistently refused to permit litigants to stretch them through creative use of the general law of limitation. The decision in State of West Bengal v. Rajpath Contractors and Engineers Ltd., d


An Arbitrator Can Grant Post-Award Interest on the Principal Alone: Supreme Court in Morgan Securities v. Videocon Industries
Supreme Court Ruling on Arbitration: Arbitrators Can Grant Post-Award Interest on Principal Alone in Morgan Securities v. Videocon Industries. A question that has long troubled arbitration practitioners in India concerns the scope of an arbitrator's discretion when awarding post-award interest. Must the arbitrator always apply the statutory rate of eighteen percent on the entire awarded sum, including pre-award interest? Or does the arbitrator retain the freedom to tailor the


You Cannot Fake Urgency to Skip Mediation: Supreme Court in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Keerthi
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


The Section 9 Bar: Once a Tribunal is Constituted, the Civil Court Door Shuts
"Exploring the Implications of the Section 9 Bar: Understanding Civil Court Limitations Post-Tribunal Constitution with adrEdge." ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel India Ltd. v. Essar Bulk Terminal Ltd. | Supreme Court of India | Civil Appeal No. 5700 of 2021 | Decided: 14.09.2021 The moment an arbitral tribunal is constituted, a civil court's power to entertain a fresh application for interim relief is not merely curtailed. It is effectively suspended, unless the applicant can dem
bottom of page
_edited.png)