Award Passed By Ineligible Arbitrator Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Jammu And Kashmir HC

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar has held that award passed by an ineligible arbitrator is liable to be set aside under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts The present petition has been filed under section 34 of the Arbitration Act against an award passed by the Arbitrator by which the claimant has been has been held entitled to recover an amount of Rs.25,20,969/ along with interest @8% per annum. Petitioners started purchasing...

Fresh Arbitrator Can Be Appointed By Court U/S 14 Of Arbitration Act If Proposed Arbitrator Is Ineligible U/S 12(5): J&K And Ladakh HC

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench of Chief Justice Tashi Rabstan affirmed that when the arbitration clause is found to be foul with the amended section 12(5) of the Arbitration Act, the appointment of the arbitrator would be beyond the pale of the arbitration agreement. In such eventuality, the court can be approached under section 14 of the Arbitration Act for seeking substitution of the arbitrator.Brief FactsThe present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Sections...

HC Upholds J&K Govt's Decision To Withdraw Budgetary Support Scheme 2018 For Reimbursement Of IGST To Manufacturing Units

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has upheld the UT government's decision to withdraw the 'Budgetary Support Scheme', notified in the year 2018 for providing budgetary support to manufacturing units in the UT, by reimbursement of Integrated Goods and Service Tax. A division bench of Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Rajesh Sekhri observed that the Scheme did not create any legitimate expectation in the units nor did it attract promissory estoppel on the government. It reasoned that the...

Any attempt To Modify Award Under Section 34 is not permissible: J&K High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has set aside a judgment from a subordinate court modifying an arbitral award while underscoring that under Section 34 of the J&K Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1997, courts lack the authority to modify arbitral awards and can only either uphold or set aside the awards.The question arose from an award in which the Arbitral Tribunal directed the J&K Government to pay over ₹78.92 crores to the claimants, along with interest. The J&K...

Disputes Predominantly Civil But Involving Elements Of Criminality Not Automatically Excluded From Arbitration: Jammu and Kashmir High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh has held that a dispute predominantly civil but involving elements of criminality is not automatically excluded from arbitration. The bench noted that unless there is a specific allegation of the parties engaging in an agreement amounting to criminal conspiracy, there should be no blanket prohibition on referring such disputes to arbitration. Brief Facts: M/s Tata Power Solar (Petitioner) successfully won...

Non-Response To Demands Invalidates Invocation of Mutual Negotiations Clause in Arbitration Agreements: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir High Court bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh held that if a party didn't respond to the demands and requests made by the other party, it can't invoke the part of the arbitration clause that such disputes and differences shall be an endeavoured to be resolved by mutual negotiations as a condition precedent for invoking the arbitration clause. Brief Facts: Ramtech Software Private Limited (“Petitioner”) was granted a contract for "Modernization of Land...

Interest For Prereference Period And Pendente Lite Interest Can't Be Claimed Under Arbitration Act, 1940: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar held that interest for the prereference period as well as the pendente lite interest cannot be claimed under the Arbitration Act, 1940. The bench held that when pre-suit interest, pendente lite interest and future interest has to be awarded on the principal sum adjudged, the interest can be awarded only on the principal sum and it does not provide for payment of interest on interest. Therefore, it held that there is no...

Leasehold Interest In Land Is An Asset Of Company And Is Capable Of Valuation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir High Court has held that leasehold interest in the land is an asset of the company and is capable of valuation.The bench of Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice Puneet Gupta has upheld the order of the Tribunal in which it was held that leasehold interest is to be included in the value of assets of M/s. Jyoti Private Limited so as to determine the fair market value of shares held by the assessee as well as other shareholders.The assessee/respondent, his wife, and two sons...

Contract To Refer Disputes To Director Of Social Forestry Department Whose Finding Is Final And Binding Constitutes Valid Arbitration Agreement: J&K High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court held that a contract to refer disputes to the Director of the Social Forestry Department, whose findings would be final and binding constituted a valid arbitration agreement. “A perusal of the said Clause 18, would show that it does not specifically mention that the dispute between the parties shall be referred to an arbitrator. What the aforesaid clause mentions is that the dispute shall be referred to the Director, Social Forestry ...

Leasehold Interest In Land Is Asset Of Company, Capable Of Valuation: Jammu & Kashmir And Ladakh High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that leasehold interest in the land is an asset of the company and is capable of valuation. As such, it is to be included in the value of the assets of M/s. Jyoti Private Limited so as to determine the fair market value of shares held by the assessee as well as other shareholders.The bench of Justice Tashi Rabstan and Justice Puneet Gupta, while upholding the ITAT's order, observed that the fair market value is defined under Section 2(22B)...

High Court At Designated 'Venue' Has Jurisdiction, J&K High Court Dismisses S. 11 Application

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court bench comprising Chief Justice N. Kotiswar Singh affirmed that when parties specify a particular location as the venue for arbitration proceedings, that location effectively becomes the seat of arbitration. Consequently, only courts with jurisdiction over that designated venue possess the authority to hear and decide on matters pertaining to the arbitration agreement. Therefore, the bench dismissed an application under Section 11(6) of the...

Arbitration Clause In The Original Contract Would Also Apply To Inseparable Additional Work Carried Out Without Execution Of A Formal Agreement: J&K&L High Court

The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has held that the arbitration clause contained in the original contract would also govern any dispute arising out of an additional work carried out without execution of a formal agreement. The bench of Chief Justice N. Kotiswas Singh held that when a contractor, initially tasked with constructing a single-lane bridge, is subsequently directed by the employer to expand the scope to build a two-lane bridge without formalizing a new agreement...