ARBITRATION
Bias of Even One Arbitrator Taints Entire Arbitral Award: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court has set aside an arbitral award, holding that the bias of even a single arbitrator is sufficient to vitiate the entire award, even where the decision is unanimous. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh said parties are entitled to an arbitral tribunal that is impartial in its entirety and not merely a neutral majority. Bias, the court held, violates Section 18 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which requires equal treatment of parties, and also goes against the...
Welfare Boards For Building And Construction Workers Mandatory Before Levy Of Cess: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has recently held that the constitution of Welfare Boards under the Building and Other Construction Workers Act, 1996 (BOCW), is a mandatory precondition for the effective levy and collection of cess under the Building and Other Construction Workers' Welfare Cess Act, 1996The court ruled that in the absence of such Welfare Boards, cess could neither have been validly levied nor collected, as the statutory scheme under both enactments presupposes the existence of a functional...
Calcutta High Court Declines To Entertain Arbitral Award Challenge In Disposed Arbitrator Appointment Plea
The Calcutta High Court has dismissed an application seeking to challenge an arbitral award after finding that it was filed in the wrong proceeding. The Court held that once it appoints an arbitrator, it cannot entertain further applications in that case and that any challenge to an award must be filed separately under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. In this case, the opposite parties approached the High Court after the arbitral award was passed but filed their challenge in the already...
Courts Cannot Substitute Plausible Arbitral View Merely Because Another Is Possible: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has reiterated that courts should exercise minimal interference with arbitral awards and cannot substitute an arbitral tribunal's interpretation of a contract merely because another view is possible. The court also held that although the Building and Other Construction Workers Act, 1996 (BOCW Act) and the Welfare Cess Act were brought into force in the mid-1990s, they could not be given effect to for several years due to the failure of governments to constitute statutory...
Bombay High Court Overturns Arbitral Award Granting Toll Loss Relief Based On Pre-Contract Meeting Minutes
The Bombay High Court has set aside an arbitral award that granted toll loss compensation to a private concessionaire by treating pre-contract Minutes of Meeting as a binding part of the contract. Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan held that the arbitral tribunal had misread the contract, effectively converting a force majeure clause into a guaranteed revenue mechanism. The Court said this interpretation was an “impossible view,” “irrational,” and suffered from “manifest perversity,” and held...
'Full and Final' Settlement Does Not Bar Arbitration On Fresh Disputes: Delhi High Court Reiterates
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that a “full and final” settlement does not automatically bar arbitration if fresh disputes arise from the settlement's implementation and the parties have agreed to arbitrate such disputes. A single-judge bench of Justice Jyoti Singh ruled that an arbitration clause incorporated in a settlement agreement and reflected in a consent award constitutes a valid arbitration agreement under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court clarified that...
Arbitration Cases Weekly Round Up: 11th January To 18th January, 2026
NOMINAL INDEX Bhagheeratha Engineering Ltd. v. State of Kerala, 2026 LLBiz SC 5Motilal Oswal Financial Services Limited v. Santosh Cordeiro & Anr., 2026 LLBiz SC 4Black Gold Resources Private Limitada v. International Coal Ventures Pvt. Ltd & Anr., 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 41Om Prakash v. Smt Laxmi Maurya, 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 54Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited v. Delkon India Pvt. Ltd., 2026 LLBiz HC (DEL) 36 National Highways Authority of India v. Roadway Solutions India Infra Limited,...
Rejection of Arbitration Claims On Limitation Is Interim Award; Challenge Lies Under Section 34: Calcutta HC
The Calcutta High Court has reiterated that where an arbitral tribunal conclusively rejects claims as barred by limitation, such a determination amounts to an interim award and is amenable to challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and not under Section 37. While Section 34 provides the remedy for challenging arbitral awards, Section 37 is confined to appeals against limited procedural or jurisdictional orders passed during the arbitral process. The ruling was...
Arbitration Clause In Partnership Reconstitution Deed Not Enforceable Against Non-Signatory: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka High Court has held that an arbitration clause contained in a partnership reconstitution deed cannot be enforced b a person who has not signed the deed, and that in such circumstances, the court cannot appoint an arbitrator under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Justice Lalitha Kanneganti made the observation in an order dated January 7 while hearing a petition filed by two outgoing partners of Shree Raghavendra Industries, seeking appointment of an arbitrator under an...
Financing Charges Under FIDIC Contract Must Be on Certified Claims: Delhi High Court Allows Jal Board Appeal
The Delhi High Court has held that financing charges under a FIDIC-based construction contract can be claimed only on amounts that are formally certified or have clearly become payable under the contract, and not on disputed or unverified claims. A Division Bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla partly allowed an appeal filed by the Delhi Jal Board against a Single Judge order that had upheld an arbitral award in favour of Mohini Electricals Ltd., setting aside the...