Delhi High Court dismisses Section 34 challenge, affirming that new limitations not raised before the tribunal cannot be introduced, rejecting the plea of incapacity. Case Title: Prime Meiden Ltd. v. Kirby Building System India Pvt. Ltd. Case No.: O.M.P. (COMM) 113/2021 Coram: Justice Jasmeet Singh Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 5217 HC Date of Decision: 08 September 2026 The Delhi High Court has dismissed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

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

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

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

Writ petitions for interest on delayed payments deemed non-maintainable when contracts prohibit interest and allow civil suits or arbitration, rules the Andhra Pradesh High Court. Yellaboina Mallaiah v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors. Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 4194 HC Court: High Court of Andhra Pradesh Case No.: Writ Petition Nos. 5506, 5608, 5712, 5748, 5781, 8818, 8895, 8978, 9279 and 9730 of 2025 Decided on: 22-Jul-26 Coram: Sri Justice Subba Reddy Satti The Andhra Prad

Calcutta High Court Rules on Amendment of Written Statements in Commercial Suits: Permitted Anytime Before Trial Under Order VI Rule 17 CPC. Case Title: Dredging and Desiltation Company Pvt. Ltd. v. Mackintosh Burn and Northern Express Consortium and Ors. The Calcutta High Court has held that amendment of a written statement in a commercial suit continues to be governed by the unamended provisions of Order VI Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and may be allowed at

Calcutta High Court clarifies that compliance with Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act cannot be replaced by independent mediation in prior non-commercial suits. Case Title: Ramji Lal Agarwal v. Sourav Agarwal The Calcutta High Court has held that once a suit is registered as a commercial suit, the mandatory requirement of pre-institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 must be complied with, and that mediation conducted earlier in a separa

Legal verdict reached in the case of M/s Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. vs. Garuda Ispat Private Limited, as decided on 22 June 2026 by the Chhattisgarh High Court. The decision of the High Court of Chhattisgarh in Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. v. Garuda Ispat Private Limited is an important contribution to the jurisprudence governing disputes under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006. The judgment highlights that while the Act provides a speedy mechanism