It is best if the arbitral tribunal decides on the question of the existence of a valid arbitration agreement. When there is a doubt regarding the validity of an arbitration agreement, the Court must send the matter to the arbitral tribunal

In a recent case, the Supreme Court (SC) has observed that Section 12(5) of Arbitration and Conciliation Act r/w the Seventh Schedule, concerning ineligibility of a person to be appointed as an Arbitrator, is a non-derogable and mandatory provision of the Act. While considering the case, the Bench observed that

The Supreme Court has ruled that powers under Articles 226/227 should be used sparingly by High Court (HC) when it comes to interfering with arbitral process. Such power should be exercised only in exceptional rarity, wherein one party is left remediless under the statute or a clear ‘bad faith’ shown by one of the parties.

High Court’s Power Under Article 226/227 To Interfere With Arbitration Process Needs To Be Exercised In Exceptional Rarity: Supreme Court (SC) The Supreme Court (SC) has observed that the power of the High Court (HC)

The Supreme Court (SC) has said tenant-landlord disputes under the Transfer of Property Act can be resolved through Arbitration instead of time-consuming and expensive litigation.
The apex court held that arbitral tribunals have the power to decide such disputes under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. However, such disputes covered and governed

Supreme Court (SC) has observed, “…, we are of the considered opinion that the Arbitration Act, 1996 has accepted the territoriality principle which has been adopted in the UNCITRAL Model Law. Section 2(2) makes a declaration that Part I of the Arbitration

The Supreme Court (SC) has dismissed the special leave petition of a firm that wanted to skip the statutory Arbitration clause in a contract and approach the court directly instead

In Big Charter Pvt Ltd v. Ezen Aviation Ptv Ltd, the Delhi High Court (HC) was of the view that under Section 9 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (1996 Act) application of an arbitration proceedings in a foreign court does not take away the jurisdiction of an Indian court. The Court was also of the view that since arbitration law in India has been codified

The Bench of Chief Justice Mohammad Raq was hearing an application led under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by the Petitioner- SJ Biz Solutions Pvt. Ltd. led an application (for short, ‘Act, 1996’) seeking appointment of an independent arbitrator to arbitrate the disputes between the Petitioner

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has said insolvency proceedings cannot be triggered on the basis of debt that has been converted into capital such as equity of a company. The appellate tribunal also said any investment cannot be ‘financial debt’ and