Tech in Dispute Resolution

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

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

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

"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

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

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

"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

Supreme Court's Constitution Bench Resolves Group of Companies Doctrine, Addressing Non-Signatory Binding Issues. Cox and Kings Ltd. v. SAP India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. | Supreme Court of India (Constitution Bench) | Arbitration Petition (Civil) No. 38 of 2020 | Decided: 06.12.2023 Can a company that never signed an arbitration agreement be pulled into arbitration proceedings? And can a parent company be bound by an agreement signed only by its subsidiary? A five-judge Constitut

Supreme Court Decision Clarifies Arbitrator Appointment Deadlines Under Section 11. M/s. Arif Azim Co. Ltd. v. M/s. Aptech Ltd. | Supreme Court of India | Section 11(6), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 How long does a party have to knock on the court's door when the other side refuses to appoint an arbitrator? The Supreme Court has now answered this with clarity: three years, and not a day more. In a significant ruling that tidies up one of arbitration law's long-stan

Understanding the Critical Role of the Arbitration Seat in Preventing Forum-Shopping: Ensuring Jurisdictional Stability. BBR (India) Private Limited v. S.P. Singla Constructions Private Limited, Civil Appeal Nos. 4130-4131 of 2022, decided on 18 May 2022 Picture this. An NBFC headquartered in Mumbai disburses a digital loan to a borrower in Kerala. The borrower defaults. Arbitration is invoked. The entire proceeding, hearings, cross-examination, arguments, happens over video