top of page

Insights & Ideas
Our blog is designed to inform, inspire, and empower you with valuable knowledge for both personal and professional growth.
Insights & Ideas
Our blog is designed to inform, inspire, and empower you with valuable knowledge for both personal and professional growth.
.png)
Insights & Ideas
Our blog is designed to inform, inspire, and empower you with valuable knowledge for both personal and professional growth.
.png)
Blogs


Civil suit not barred by foreign arbitral award that has not attained enforceability in India; cause of action does not merge into unenforceable foreign award: Delhi high court
Delhi High Court rules that civil suits are not impeded by foreign arbitral awards lacking enforceability in India, ensuring causes of action remain separate from unenforceable foreign awards. Campos Brothers Farms v. Matru Bhumi Supply Chain Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. | RFA(OS)(COMM) 3/2025 | Delhi High Court | Decided on May 5, 2026 A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court has set aside an order rejecting a civil plaint at the threshold, holding that the cause of action pleaded in
5 hours ago4 min read
Â
Â


Judicial restraint under section 34: Delhi high court upholds arbitral tribunal's refusal of specific performance
Delhi High Court Reaffirms Judicial Restraint, Upholds Arbitral Tribunal’s Decision Under Section 34 on Specific Performance. Case: Imran Ahmed Ansari & Anr. v. Intex Technologies (India) Ltd. & Anr. Court: Delhi High Court Citation: (2026) ibclaw.in 3020 HC Date of Decision: 08 May 2026 The Delhi High Court in Imran Ahmed Ansari & Anr. v. Intex Technologies (India) Ltd. & Anr. reaffirmed the narrow scope of judicial interference with arbitral awards under Section 34 of the A
1 day ago4 min read
Â
Â


No power to fix compensation: Karnataka high court on the limits of section 34 in NH act land acquisition awards
Karnataka High Court Ruling Highlights Section 34 Limitations in Land Acquisition Compensation Awards. Case: P. Nagaraju v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and Competent Authority and Ors. Bench: Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice C.M. Poonacha, High Court of Karnataka Background The appellant, P. Nagaraju, owned lands measuring 631 sq. mtrs. in Survey No. 42/1 and 50 sq. mtrs. in Survey No. 92/2 of Mayaganahalli Village, Bidadi Hobli, Ramanagara Taluk and District. The
2 days ago5 min read
Â
Â


Writ petitions against MSMED act proceedings are not maintainable: Madras high court applies India glycols
Madras High Court Rules Writ Petitions Against MSMED Act Proceedings Unmaintainable, Impacting India Glycols Case Case: Kinetic Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Micro Small Enterprises Facilitation Council and Anr. Bench: Justice Abdul Quddhose, High Court of Madras Background Kinetic Industries Pvt. Ltd. filed a writ petition before the Madras High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated July 15, 2025 passed by the Micro and Small Ent
5 days ago4 min read
Â
Â


Arbitrator's administrative engagements constitute sufficient cause for extension under section 29A: Himachal Pradesh high court
Himachal Pradesh High Court Rules Arbitrator's Administrative Duties Justify Extension under Section 29A. The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that the administrative preoccupations of an arbitrator who simultaneously holds a senior government office constitute sufficient cause for extending the time limit for passing an arbitral award under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Justice Virender Singh extended the mandate of the Divisional Commissione
6 days ago3 min read
Â
Â


Ssangyong engineering and construction company ltd. v. S.B. engineering associates, arbitration appeal nos. 14 of 2023 and 25 of 2023, decided on 22 April 2026 (High court of Madhya Pradesh).
Legal proceedings in progress at a desk with a gavel and scales, representing the High Court of Madhya Pradesh's decision on the Ssangyong Engineering and Construction Company Ltd. vs. S.B. Engineering Associates, Arbitration Appeals. The decision delivered by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Ssangyong Engineering and Construction Company Ltd. v. S.B. Engineering Associates marks a significant development in Indian arbitration jurisprudence concerning the appointment of ar
Jun 34 min read
Â
Â


One sale deed is not enough: Supreme court on the methodology for determining compensation under section 26 of the 2013 LA Act
Case: Project Director, National Highways Authority of India v. Alfa Remidis Ltd. and Ors. Citation:2026 INSC 480 Supreme Court Clarifies Compensation Methodology Under Section 26 of the 2013 LA Act: One Sale Deed is Insufficient. Background Alfa Remidis Ltd. owned 1,394 square meters of land in Survey No. 66 of Mouza Pardi (Rithi), Tahsil Saoner, Nagpur District. The land was acquired for the four-laning of National Highway No. 547-E pursuant to a notification dated May 9, 2
Jun 24 min read
Â
Â


A promise to make a promise: Supreme court on letters of intent, concluded contracts, and incorporation of arbitration clauses
Supreme Court Examines Letters of Intent and Arbitration Clauses in New Ruling. Case: Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. (MSEDCL) and Ors. v. R Z Malpani Citation: Civil Appeal No. 4307 of 2026 (SLP (C) No. 36889 of 2025) | Decided on: April 9, 2026 Bench: Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice A.S. Chandurkar Background Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. (MSEDCL), a State Government-owned electricity distribution utility, floated a ten
May 295 min read
Â
Â


Collaborator bound by joint undertaking is a veritable party to contract, can invoke arbitration clause: Supreme court
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
May 264 min read
Â
Â


Section 29A inapplicable where arbitration invoked prior to 2015 amendment: Delhi high court in partnership property dispute
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
May 265 min read
Â
Â
bottom of page
_edited.png)