top of page


When proof matters: Delhi high court on damages and confidentiality in conciliation
Delhi High Court Deliberates on the Importance of Evidence in Conciliation Cases Involving Damages and Confidentiality. Eco Green Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. v. Vikartan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. The Delhi High Court, in Eco Green Buildtech Pvt. Ltd. v. Vikartan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., examined important issues concerning the award of damages in arbitration and the confidentiality of conciliation proceedings. The judgment highlights that while an arbitral tribunal may use its exper


Plaint cannot be rejected under order VII rule 11 CPC by relying on documents filed by defendant: Delhi high court
Delhi High Court Clarifies: Plaint Cannot Be Dismissed Based on Defendant's Documents Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Case Title: Central Court Hotel v. Jasmeet Singh Marwah and Anr. Case Number: I.A. 6645/2023 in CS(OS) 147/2023 Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 5155 HC Coram: Justice Subramonium Prasad The Delhi High Court has dismissed an application filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking rejection of a plaint, holding that the scope of enquiry u


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


Supreme court clarifies when an arbitration clause in a loan agreement binds a personal guarantor
Supreme Court Provides Clarity on Arbitration Clauses in Loan Agreements Affecting Personal Guarantors. The Supreme Court of India, in National Skill Development Corporation v. Surya Wires Private Limited & Ors., decided on 8 September 2026, examined whether an arbitration clause contained in a Loan Agreement could bind a person who had executed a Personal Guarantee in his individual capacity, where the Guarantee was expressly incorporated into the Loan Agreement. The Court


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


Emden formula, being a construction contract tool, cannot be applied to assess damages in dealership agreements: Madras high court
Madras High Court Rules Emden Formula Not Applicable for Dealership Agreement Damages Assessment. Case Title: Hyundai Motor India Ltd. v. St. Antonys Cars Pvt. Ltd. Case Number: OSA No. 38 of 2021 | Madras High Court | Justice P. Velmurugan and Justice K. Govindarajan Thilakavadi The Madras High Court has set aside an arbitral award to the extent it awarded damages to a former automobile dealer by applying the Emden formula, holding that the formula, being confined to comput


Supreme court disposes of SLP against arbitrator's order on stay of proceedings amid IBC moratorium plea, keeps issues open
Supreme Court Finalizes Decision on SLP Related to Arbitrator's Stay of Proceedings, Maintaining Flexibility Amid IBC Moratorium Issue. Case Details Case Title: Umesh Bajaj v. Amit Khaneja and Anr. Coram: Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran The Supreme Court has disposed of a Special Leave Petition filed against an order of an Arbitrator on a plea for stay of arbitral proceedings on account of interim moratorium under Section 96 of the Insolvency and Bankrupt


Delhi high court upholds Rs. 662 crore arbitral award in favour of Toyo engineering-L&T consortium, dismisses IOCL's section 34 challenge
Delhi High Court affirms Rs. 662 crore arbitral award favoring Toyo Engineering-L&T consortium, dismissing IOCL's Section 34 challenge in a landmark decision. Case Title: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. v. Toyo Engineering Corporation and Anr. Coram: Justice Amit Bansal The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging an arbitral award dated 11th March, 2019, whereby a con


120-day timeline under order VIII rule 1 CPC applies to plaintiff's written statement to counter-claim in commercial suits: supreme court
Supreme Court Enforces 120-Day Timeline for Plaintiff's Written Response to Counter-Claims in Commercial Disputes. Case Title: A.K. Ghosh & Company and Ors. v. Biman Bose and Ors. The Supreme Court has held that the mandatory 120-day timeframe prescribed under the proviso to Order VIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, as applicable to commercial suits under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, also governs the filing of a written statement by a plaintiff to a defenda


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


The Section 11 Deadline: Supreme Court Settles the Limitation Clock for Arbitrator Appointment
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
bottom of page
_edited.png)