When arbitrator fails to decide matter in accordance with terms of contract governing parties, it will attract “patent illegality ground” as it amounts to gross contravention of S. 28(3). [State of Chhattisgarh v. SAL Udyog (P) Ltd., (2022) 2 SCC 275]
Scope of interference with, by Court — Law summarized: The fact situation that the learned sole arbitrator relied on the facts of the case, the conduct of the parties and some other material terms and conditions of the contract and was lucid in his reasoning. Held, the consistent view is taken in several judicial pronouncements
Arbitration Act, 1940 — Ss. 30, 33 and 39 — Arbitral award — Read More »
Award passed by an arbitrator appointed under 1996 Act by Court with consent of parties despite the existence of M.P. Madhyastham Adhikaran Adhiniyam, 1983 is binding, when the same attains finality i.e. is not appealed against at the appropriate stage. Subsequent invocation of arbitration under the 1983 Act regarding identical claims i.e. after an award
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 11 and 34: Read More »
Court had power to condone eight days’ delay, which was less than thirty days, in terms of proviso to sub-section (3) to S. 34 of the 1996 Act. In this case, in application seeking condonation of delay, it was inter alia stated that after receiving a copy of award appellant had engaged an empanelled advocate
The duties of the insured and insurer to disclose all material facts at contract formation/pre-contract stage or renewal stage, held, include the duty of the insurer or its agent to notify the insured of any material change(s) in the policy terms at the pre-contract or renewal stage. Thus, held, insurer cannot contend that the insured
Principle of uberrimae fidei i.e. principle of utmost good faith, held, imposes meaningful reciprocal duties owed by the insured to the insurer and vice versa. That is to say, just as the insured has a duty to disclose all material facts, the insurer must also inform the insured about the terms and conditions of the
Liability of insurer with regard to fire incident at the warehouse of assured under the first policy is excluded, where fire incident also covered by a second policy (a “marine policy” as per terms of the first policy in this case) and the first policy excludes liability in such event. Exclusion clause(s) in insurance policy
Fire accident resulting in death and injuries, thus joint and several liability of A) private organisers of the event for failure to take adequate safety precautions and vicarious liability of B) State/ state officials for negligence in performance of statutory duties. Where life and personal liberty have been violated, absence of any applicable statutory provision(s)
The High Court has not assigned reasons for the grant of bail to the respondents accused and has granted bail by a cryptic order de hors any reasoning. However, the Court deciding a bail application cannot completely divorce its decision from material aspects of the case such as the allegations made against the accused; severity
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 439 — Grant of bail Read More »
The view taken by the Commissioner had been a possible view of the matter in the given set of facts and circumstances. When no substantial question of law arising within meaning of S. 30 nor were findings of Commissioner perverse or suffering from any such manifest illegality as to give rise to a “substantial question
Terms & Conditions
The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from soliciting work or advertising in any manner. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, the user acknowledges that:
The information provided under this website is for informational purposes only and solely available at your request. It should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertising. I AGREE