Bombay High Court

All Posts
Mediation
Tech in Dispute Resolution
Case Studies
Digital Conciliation
Regulatory / Legal Trends
Arbitration
Award

Banner graphic with scales of justice and laptop showing text on Section 34 court correcting computational errors in arbitral award applying Gayatri Balasamy by Bombay High Court

Section 34 court can correct computational errors in arbitral award without merits review, applying Gayatri Balasamy: Bombay high court

Bombay High Court Rules: Section 34 Courts Can Correct Computational Errors in Arbitral Awards Without Merits Review, Following Gayatri Balasamy. Case Title: Themis Medicare Ltd. v. Mohinder Pal Singh Anand and Anr. Case Number: Arbitration Petition No. 322 of 2018 with Interim Application No. 3410 of 2026 Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 4895 HC Coram: Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh The Bombay High Court has partly allowed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliat

Gold balance scale of justice on a table before a judge, alongside text regarding Section 9 arbitration petition maintainability

Section 9 arbitration petition maintainable despite prior appointment of arbitrator where tribunal becomes non-functional: Bombay high court

Bombay High Court Rules: Section 9 Arbitration Petitions Maintainable Even if Tribunal Becomes Non-Functional Before Arbitrator Appointment. Case Title: Seetaram Shiva Shetty v. Sudhir Vasu Shetty and Ors. Case Number: Comm. Arbitration Petition (L) No. 24746 of 2026 Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 4738 HC Coram: Justice Amit Borkar The Bombay High Court has held that a petition under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 remains maintainable even after an Arbi

Scales of justice and a legal gavel alongside text about the Bombay High Court directing a developer to hand over possession of redevelopment property to a housing society

Bombay high court directs developer to hand over possession of redevelopment property to society, appoints arbitrator in section 9 petition

Bombay High Court Orders Developer to Transfer Redevelopment Property to Society; Arbitrator Appointed in Section 9 Petition Case Title: Padmavati Nagar Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. v. Viraj Properties and Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 4900 HC Coram: Justice Amit Borkar The Bombay High Court has directed a developer to hand over vacant possession of a redevelopment property to a co-operative housing society within four weeks, while restraining it from

Wooden gavel on a wooden desk representing the Bombay High Court Section 9 arbitration ruling on trademark infringement.

Bombay high court restrains former Kidzee franchisee from using mark "KIDGEE", holds post-termination trademark dispute arbitrable under section 9

Bombay High Court issues injunction against former Kidzee franchisee for using "KIDGEE" mark; declares post-termination trademark dispute arbitrable under Section 9. Case Title: Zee Learn Ltd. v. Beauty Singh Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 4899 HC Coram: Justice Amit Borkar The Bombay High Court has restrained a former franchisee of the "KIDZEE" preschool brand from using the mark "KIDGEE" or any other deceptively similar name, holding that a dispute concerning continued use of

A judge signing a contract agreement next to a balance scale of justice and legal books, representing the Bombay High Court ruling on arbitration delay condonation.

Bombay high court condones 527 days delay in section 11 arbitration application

Bombay High Court pardons a 527-day delay in filing a Section 11 arbitration application, demonstrating flexibility in legal proceedings. The Bombay High Court in Atul Projects India Pvt. Ltd. v. Taksha Spaces Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., decided on 1 September 2026, considered whether a delay of 527 days in filing an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 could be condoned. The Court held that the Applicant had shown sufficient cause and that the

Section 9 petition maintainable despite pending NCLT proceedings on overlapping facts where rights claimed arise from shareholders' agreement: Bombay high court

"Bombay High Court rules Section 9 petition maintainable amid ongoing NCLT proceedings due to shareholders' agreement, as shown on adrEdge ODR platform." Case Name: Shiv Keshrimal Agrawal v. Farma Hub Overseas Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 4177 HC Coram: Justice Amit Borkar The Bombay High Court has partly allowed a petition filed under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, granting limited interim protection to a Director and 33% shareholde

Interpretation of limitation of liability clause in contract is within arbitrator's domain, section 34 court cannot substitute its own view: Bombay high court

"Legal Authority Confirmed: Bombay High Court affirms that interpreting limitation of liability clauses in contracts remains within the arbitrator's jurisdiction, emphasizing non-interference by courts under section 34." Case Name: Conso Feeds v. Alfa Laval (India) Pvt. Ltd. Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 4335 HC Coram: Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh The Bombay High Court has dismissed a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that t

Graphic illustration of Bombay High Court ruling on arbitration agreement assignment and assignee rights by adrEdge

Arbitration agreement travels with assignment where assignee steps into original lender's shoes and borrower acts upon it: Bombay high court

Arbitration agreements remain valid through assignments, allowing assignees to assume the original lender's role, as confirmed by the Bombay High Court. Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. v. Sitaram Energy and Logistics Ltd. Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 4019 HC Court: High Court of Bombay Case No.: Comm Arbitration Petition (L) No. 5535 of 2025 with Comm Arbitration Petition (L) No. 5944 of 2025 Decided on: 23-Jul-26 Coram: Mr. Justice Amit Borkar The Bombay High Court has held that wher

Graphic banner detailing the Bombay High Court ruling on Section 9 petitions, equipment receivership, and bank account attachments.

Bombay high court appoints receiver to trace hypothecated construction equipment, declines bank account attachment in section 9 petition

Bombay High Court Appoints Receiver for Hypothecated Equipment, Rejects Bank Account Attachment Request in Section 9 Petition. Tata Capital Ltd. v. Jain Globals and Ors. Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 4173 HC Court: High Court of Bombay Case No.: Comm Arbitration Petition (L) No. 8727 of 2026 (with 23 connected petitions) Decided on: 28-Jul-26 Coram: Mr. Justice Amit Borkar The Bombay High Court has held that while a financier is entitled to interim protection for tracing and pre

Gavel on a wooden table representing Bombay High Court's ruling on Section 9 of the Arbitration Act in Norvic Shipping v. Zigma International.

When courts step in before the award: Bombay high court explains the scope of section 9 in Norvic Shipping Asia PTE ltd. v. Zigma International

Bombay High Court Clarifies Legal Intervention: Understanding Section 9 in Norvic Shipping Asia PTE Ltd. v. Zigma International. The Bombay High Court in Norvic Shipping Asia PTE Ltd. v. Zigma International, Commercial Arbitration Petition (L) No. 15734 of 2026, decided on 2 July 2026, has delivered an important judgment explaining the scope of interim protection under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996. The decision discusses the circumstances in which a