Directions For Refund Of Consideration With Interest Must Be Considered Based On Conduct Of Parties During Arbitral Proceedings: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court has held that in arbitral proceedings, the direction for refund of the deposited consideration amount with interest has to be considered in the background of the conduct of the parties and their admissions during the proceedings.A division bench of Justices Soumen Sen and Biswaroop Chowdury held:The learned arbitrator rejected the claim for specific performance of the contract as claimed by the present appellants. However, the appellants were directed to refund the sum of...

Court Can Decline To Refer Dispute To Arbitration When Time-Barred Claim Is Evident From Record: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that when a claim is ex facie time-barred and no trial is needed to determine whether it is barred by limitation, the referral court can refuse to refer the matter to arbitration under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act). Brief Facts: This application has been filed under section 11 of the Arbitration Act seeking appointment of an arbitrator to adjudicate disputes arising from...

Composite Reference Of Disputes From Distinct Purchase Orders To Arbitration Is Valid When Parties' Conduct Indicates Single Transaction: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that a composite reference of disputes to arbitration arising out of distinct purchase and service orders can be made when the conduct of the parties demonstrates that they were all part of a single business transaction. Brief Facts: The petitioner was engaged as an agent-cum-sub-contractor by the respondent, for procurement, setting-up, erection, commissioning and maintenance of solar power installations for projects,...

Prescribing Pre-Qualification Criteria By Authority In Tender Document Cannot Be Considered Arbitrary If Conditions Are Reasonable: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Chaitali Chatterjee Das has held that the imposition of pre-qualification conditions by the tender-inviting authority cannot be interfered with by the courts when sufficient guidelines have been provided in the tender documents on how the authority's discretion shall be exercised. Brief Facts: The writ petitioner is a partnership firm and has set up a unit in BHARUCH, Gujrat for converting High density...

Non-Signatories To Arbitration Agreement Can Be Made Party To Dispute If Reliefs Sought Against Them Align With Those Sought Against Signatories: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Uday Kumar has observed that if the reliefs against the non-signatories to the arbitration agreement are in harmony with the reliefs sought against the signatories, particularly when the legal relationship between the signatories and non-signatories are on the same platform vis-a-vis the cause of action of the suit and the reliefs claimed, then the non-signatories could very well be brought within the purview of the ...

Tendering Authority Is Best Judge To Decide T&C Of Tender, Judicial Interference Permissible Only When Terms Are Arbitrary: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) has held that tender issuing authority is the best judge to decide terms and conditions of a tender. Such terms and conditions cannot be tinkered with by the Judicial Authority unless they are found to be arbitrary or whimsical. Brief Facts: A writ petition was filed by the Appellant seeking a writ of mandamus to set aside, rescind or modify the e-tender issued on September 18, 2024...

Writ Petition Is Not Maintainable When Effective And Efficacious Remedy In Form Of Arbitration Is Available: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court Bench of Chief Justice T.S. Sivagnanam and Justice Hiranmay Bhattacharyya held that it cannot entertain a writ petition if an effective and efficacious remedy, in the form of arbitration, is available. It said that the High Court would normally exercise its jurisdiction in 3 contingencies namely (i) when the writ petition was filed for enforcement of any fundamental rights, (ii) where there has been violation of principle of natural justice, or (iii) where the order...

Loss Of Profit In Works Contracts Can Be Awarded Upon Illegal Termination, Even In Absence Of Direct Proof: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court division bench of Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Biswaroop Chowdhury has held that once a contractor establishes an illegal and unjustified termination of the contract by the employer, there is no need to prove the actual loss suffered. A reasonable expectation of profit is implicit in a works contract, and compensation must be awarded accordingly. The court distinguished between claims for 'loss of profit' (resulting from unexecuted work due to illegal or...

Threshold To Prove Fraud & Corruption In Arbitral Award Is Much Higher Than Merely Criticising Findings Of Arbitrator: Calcutta High Court

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has observed that in order to prove that the making of the award was vitiated by fraud, the petitioner would have to demonstrate that the unethical behaviour of the arbitrator surpassed all moral standards. The Court reiterated that an honest mistake or incorrect appreciation of the terms of the contract cannot be either fraud or corruption. Background Facts The dispute referred to arbitration arose out of an agreement for...

Arbitration Agreement Valid Without Specifying 'Applicable Law', 'Seat' Or 'Venue' If Intent To Refer Dispute To Private Tribunal Is Clear: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar has held that for an arbitration agreement to be binding, neither the applicable law nor the seat or venue needs to be mentioned. As long as the clause indicates that the parties had agreed and there was a meeting of minds to refer any dispute to a private tribunal for adjudication of the disputes, the clause would constitute an arbitration clause. Brief Facts The petitioner filed the application for appointment of an...

Original Side Rules On Accepting Counterclaim & Reply Need Amending Due To Rigidity Of S.18 Of Commercial Courts Act: Calcutta HC Frames Guidelines

The Calcutta High Court has held that the court's original side rules on accepting of plaint and counterclaim need to be amended due to the rigidity of Section 18 of the Commercial Courts act. In doing so, the bench of Justices Soumen Sen and Biswaroop Chowdhury also framed guidelines for the same till the amended rules were implemented. The Court held: In view of the stringent provisions in the Commercial Court Act, with regard to filing of pleadings and more particularly written statement...

Referral Court Can Reject Arbitration Only In Exceptional Cases Where Plea Of Fraud Appears To Be Ex Facie Devoid Of Merit: Calcutta HC

The Calcutta High Court bench of Justice Shampa Sarkar observed that unless the arbitration agreement prima facie appeared to be inoperative on account of fraud, the referral Court should not indulge in a roving inquiry as such an inquiry is within the domain of the arbitrator. The fact whether the agreement was induced by fraud would entail a detailed consideration of the evidence lead by the parties and these issues cannot be decided by the referral court. Background The loan...