All High Courts
Application U/S 29A Of A&C Act Is Not Maintainable After Termination Of Proceedings Following Arbitrator's Withdrawal: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court held that section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) can be invoked only when the proceedings are pending. It cannot be invoked when the arbitral tribunal has become functus officio. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh held that “in the case in hand, the proceedings were abandoned and consequently stood terminated as was explained...
Under SARFAESI & RDB Acts, Dues Of Secured Creditors Take Precedence Over Govt Dues: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court has held that under Section 26-E of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and Section 31B of the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act, 1993, the debts of the secured creditors will take precedence over all over debts including crown debts.The bench of Justice Shekhar B. Saraf and Justice Praveen Kumar...
Lease Renewal Disputes With PSU's Are Arbitrable If Not Related To Eviction Under Public Premises Act: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court held that renewal of lease agreements with public sector undertakings are arbitrable and such disputes are not prohibited under Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (PP Act) when lessee continues in possession lawfully and the rent is being accepted by the lessor. Accordingly, the present application under section 11 of the Arbitration...
Mutually Contradictory Findings By Same Arbitrator At Different Stage Of Proceedings Renders Final Award Patently Illegal: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court held that declaring earlier proceedings non est, even when no objections were raised regarding the recording of the undertaking in those proceedings, constituted a perverse finding. The Court observed that such proceedings, which merely recorded an undertaking, could not fall within the ambit of Section 31 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration...
Mens Rea Not Prerequisite For Imposing Penalty U/S 117 Of Customs Act: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court held that mens rea is not a prerequisite for imposing a penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act. Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962, addresses penalties for contraventions not specifically mentioned elsewhere in the Act. Justices S.G. Pandit and K.V. Aravind stated that a plain reading of Section 117 of the Act makes it clear that whenever...
Tax Demands Raised Post Approval Of IBC Resolution Plan Are Not Enforceable: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court recently reiterated that tax demands raised by revenue authorities after the approval of a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) are unenforceable if the claims were not submitted during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).A single bench of Justice M Nagaprasanna observed,“There is no jurisdiction to parallelly...
Bank Can Assign Debt Even If NPA Classification Is Later Declared Invalid: Rajasthan High Court
The Rajasthan High Court dismissed a writ petition filed against SBI's assignment of debt in favor of Alchemist Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd. (AARC) holding that even if NPA classification is later declared invalid, it does not affect the validity of assignment of debt. Justice Rekha Borana held that “the assignment cannot be invalidated merely because the NPA classification...
Objections U/S 47 CPC Can't Be Entertained In Enforcement Of Arbitral Awards U/S 36 Of A&C Act: Orissa High Court
The Orissa High Court has recently held that objections under Section 47 of the Code of Civil Procedure ('CPC') cannot be allowed to be raised in the enforcement proceeding of an arbitral award, as enunciated under the provision of Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('A & C Act').While bringing clarity as to applicability of Section 47 of CPC to arbitral proceedings,...
Performance Of Every Contract Would Be Jeopardised If Partial Breakdown Of Machinery Is Considered 'Force Majeure' Event: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court partly set aside an arbitral award which directed the National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) to refund of Rs. 2 crore to M/s Murli Industries Ltd. holding that the finding of the arbitrator that breakdown of a machinery constituted a force majeure event cannot be sustained. The court however upheld the arbitrator's finding that the time was...
Information Regarding GST Returns Of Company Cannot Be Disclosed Under RTI Act: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court on Tuesday (October 14) held that a company's Goods and Services Tax (GST) returns filing cannot be disclosed under the Right To Information (RTI) Act. Sitting at Aurangabad bench, single-judge Justice Arun Pednekar noted that section 158(1) of the GST Act prohibits disclosure of information of GST returns to third parties and that section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act too...
Pendency Of Appeal U/S 37 A&C Act Against First Award Does Not Bar Fresh Arbitration Proceedings: Bombay High Court
The Bombay High Court held that pendency of an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) does not prohibit a party from initiating a fresh round of arbitration when an earlier arbitral award has already been set aside. Accordingly, the present application under section 11 of the Arbitration Act was allowed and a sole...
Apportionment Of Liability Without Evidence Is Akin To 'Panchayati Approach': Bombay High Court Sets Aside NSE Arbitral Award Against Broker
The Bombay High Court set aside an arbitral award passed under National Stock Exchange (NSE) bye-laws that had upheld an order passed by Investor Grievance Redressal Panel (IGRP) directing Peerless Securities Limited to pay ₹7.18 lakhs to Vostok (Fareast) Securities Pvt. Ltd. for the losses caused by unauthorised trading in the trading and future segment. The IGRP had held that...