ACA-85

Whether Hire Purchase Agreement entered into between the parties under the Arbitration Act, 1940 after the said act was repealed by Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is valid and binding on the parties – ICDS Ltd. Vs. Sri Bhaskaran Pillai and Ors. – Karnataka High Court

Hon’ble Karnataka High Court refers judgment in Purushottam s/o Tulsiram Badwaik Vs. Anil & Ors. (2018) ibclaw.in 137 SC and holds that it is very clear that, even when the proceedings had commenced under 1940 Act, the subsequent commencement of arbitral proceedings had to be in terms of the 1996 Act. Hence, it is clear that, if any proceedings had to be initiated, the same shall be in terms of the 1996 Act. If there be such an arbitration agreement which satisfies the requirements of Section 7 of the 1996 Act, and if no arbitral proceeding had commenced before the 1996 Act came into force, the matter would be completely governed by the provisions of the 1996 Act. Any reference to the 1940 Act in the arbitration agreement would be of no consequence and the matter would be referred to arbitration only in terms of the 1996 Act consistent with the basic intent of the parties and discernible from the arbitration agreement to refer the disputes to arbitration.

Whether Hire Purchase Agreement entered into between the parties under the Arbitration Act, 1940 after the said act was repealed by Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is valid and binding on the parties – ICDS Ltd. Vs. Sri Bhaskaran Pillai and Ors. – Karnataka High Court Read Post »

Arbitral award is not a decree under Section 2(2) of CPC, therefore, objection filed under Section 47 of CPC is not maintainable – India Oil Corporation Ltd. and Another Vs. The Commercial Court and Another – Allahabad High Court

Hon’ble High Court held that:
(i) An agreement can be made even before enactment of New Act, 1996 for its applicability and in arbitration clause there is such agreement already present, therefore, there is no need to have any new agreement for compliance of Section 85(2)(a) and proceedings can be continued in New Act, 1996.
(ii) It is apparently clear that Apex Court in Paramjeet Singh Patheja Vs. ICDS Ltd. has firmed view that though the arbitral award can be enforced under Section 36 of New Act alongwith the provisions of CPC, but arbitral award is not a decree under Section 2(2) of CPC.
(iii) Arbitral award is not a decree under Section 2(2) of CPC, therefore, objection filed under Section 47 of CPC is not maintainable.

Arbitral award is not a decree under Section 2(2) of CPC, therefore, objection filed under Section 47 of CPC is not maintainable – India Oil Corporation Ltd. and Another Vs. The Commercial Court and Another – Allahabad High Court Read Post »

Whether the provisions of the IBC, 2016 interdict the appointment of an Arbitrator by invoking Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – M/s. Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. M/s. J. Poonamchand & Sons – Bombay High Court

Hon’ble High Court held that (i) The admission of an application after recording its satisfaction as contemplated by Section 7(5) of the IB Code would be the starting point where the bar under Section 238 of the IB Code can be said to be capable of being invoked and the mere filing of an application under Section 7(1) of the IB Code cannot be said to be enough to invoke the bar. (ii) The mere filing of an application under Section 7(1) of the IB Code, would not act as a bar to any proceedings under other statutes, until and unless the satisfaction as contemplated by Section 7(4) r/w Section 7(5)(a) of the IB Code is recorded by the Adjudicating Authority and the application is admitted. (iii) There does not appear to be anything inconsistent between the provisions of the A & C Act and the IB Code, inasmuch as the provisions of Section 238 of the IB Code would come into play only upon an order having been passed by the Adjudicating Authority under Section 7(5) of the IB Code and therefore an application under Section 11(6) of the A & C Act, till such time cannot be said to be not maintainable.

Whether the provisions of the IBC, 2016 interdict the appointment of an Arbitrator by invoking Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – M/s. Sunflag Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. Vs. M/s. J. Poonamchand & Sons – Bombay High Court Read Post »

Scroll to Top