Latest court orders, judgments, and legal developments from Indian courts — AI-curated and summarized.
The Supreme Court has reiterated that arbitration orders made under Section 16 cannot be re-examined in writ jurisdiction. The court has held that the issue of stamping related to the arbitration will remain open for consideration at the Section 34 stage.
Senior Advocate Darius Khambata criticized the Finance Ministry’s 2024 arbitration memo, labeling it as a reaction from a 'disgruntled litigant' during a recent symposium. This highlights ongoing tensions regarding arbitration practices in Indian governance.
The Bombay High Court has upheld the IBBI's Regulation 31A, permitting a 0.25% regulatory fee on the realisable value to creditors. This affirmation assures the standing of IBBI as a regulatory body during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
The Supreme Court limits writ jurisdiction in arbitration cases, specifying that writs can only be entertained in instances of a clear lack of jurisdiction. This ruling develops the understanding of the interplay between Section 16 objections and extraordinary relief in arbitration contexts.
Former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud has been appointed as an arbitrator in a significant investment treaty dispute between Russia and Ukraine's state-owned Oschadbank. This appointment enhances India's recognition in international arbitration.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that the corporate veil of a non-signatory entity cannot be lifted at the interim stage in relation to a shareholder's arbitration agreement, reinforcing the integrity of corporate structures.
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has ordered a status quo in a directorship dispute involving an arbitration clause, emphasizing the need for the parties to maintain the current management structure until further hearings can take place. This ruling reinforces the principles of corporate governance.
The National Company Law Tribunal ruled that the resolution professional can recover and preserve corporate debtor’s electric vehicle assets during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, leaving pending dues claims for separate adjudication.
The NCLT has ruled that the resolution professional can recover and preserve the assets of a corporate debtor during the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP), despite any existing arbitration agreements. This ruling clarifies asset recovery during insolvency proceedings.
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has ruled that an arbitration agreement does not prevent the recovery of a corporate debtor's electric vehicle assets during the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), leaving a claim of ₹1.14 crore open for separate adjudication.
The Calcutta High Court has appointed an arbitrator to resolve a dispute regarding unpaid allocations tied to false Income Tax disclosures by a builder. This ruling emphasizes the legal standing of arbitration in such disputes.
The Delhi High Court has authorized the release of $99 million in foreign arbitral awards to Vedanta and Ravva Oil, rejecting the Central government's objections. The enforcement petition brought by the companies was granted by Justice Jasmeet Singh.