top of page
_edited.png)
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
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
Delay of twenty seven days in filing section 34 petition condoned where judgment debtor diligently pursued section 33 application and related proceedings: Delhi high court
Delhi High Court Condones 27-Day Delay in Filing Section 34 Petition Due to Diligent Pursuit of Section 33 Applications by Judgment Debtor. Case Title: Inox Wind Ltd. and Anr. v. Jasdan Energy Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 5008 HC Coram: Justice Avneesh Jhingan The Delhi High Court has condoned a delay of twenty seven days in filing a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, holding that the delay stood explained by the judgment
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
Award In favour of appellant not severable from portion set aside for patent illegality: Karnataka high court
Karnataka High Court Rules: Appellant's Award Nullified Due to Patent Illegality Integration. Case Details Case Title: Krishna Murthy Constructions v. Perfect Electricals and Ors. Coram: Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice K.S. Hemalekha The Karnataka High Court has held that where the principal claim awarded in favour of a party is found to be patently illegal, the award is not severable and the entire award is liable to be set aside under Section 34 of the Arbitration a
bottom of page