Arbitration Act

The Supreme Court holds a 1996 contract clause barring interest 'in any other respect whatsoever' stripped an arbitral tribunal's power to award pre-reference interest on a ₹3.30 crore award.

The Supreme Court holds that a non-signatory who executed a related Share Purchase Agreement referencing the main settlement can still be a 'veritable party' bound by arbitration, refining the Section 11 referral-court standard.

The Supreme Court in Hirani Developers clarifies when an arbitration clause from an earlier agreement becomes binding through incorporation by reference, emphasizing drafting precision and contractual intent.

The Supreme Court clarifies that arbitration agreement consent requirement India is mandatory, holding that arbitration cannot be imposed without mutual agreement between parties.

The Supreme Court clarifies arbitration clause finality and judicial review, holding that contractual clauses cannot exclude legal remedies or make one party the final judge of its own dispute.

In a significant ruling on procedural compliance, the Delhi High Court upheld a ₹32.76 crore arbitral award against the Union of India. The court held that filing a Section 34 petition without essential documents constitutes a "non-est" filing, which fails to toll the statute of limitations.

The Supreme Court has clarified Section 29A arbitration jurisdiction, holding that extension petitions lie before competent civil courts and not only before appointing High Courts.

The Supreme Court holds that where an arbitration agreement itself is alleged to be forged, courts must first decide its existence and cannot compel arbitration. The ruling clarifies fraud-based non-arbitrability and curbs misuse of Article 227.

The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Centre on a plea seeking operationalization of the Arbitration Council of India, raising questions about regulatory gaps in commercial arbitration and the government’s delay in implementing statutory reforms.