Esheria India Case Law
Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter India case law

Results update automatically as you type.

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Administrative law

AMIT KUMAR & ORS. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

The Court directed the appointment of Dr. T.C.A. Anant as Technical Consultant to the National Task Force for comprehensive and scientific analysis of the survey data and directed the Ministry of Education to pass an order of appointment at the earliest and to extend necessary administrative support, infrastructure and data access and to provide appropriate remuneration/honorarium in accordance with prevalent norms.

Source excerpt

  • Appointment of technical consultant
  • Administrative support and infrastructure
  • Data access for survey analysis
  • Remuneration/honorarium
  • National task force
  • Student mental health survey data analysis
Read case analysis
Arbitration

AVITEL POST STUDIOZ LIMITED & ORS. versus HSBC PI HOLDINGS (MAURITIUS) LIMITED (PREVIOUSLY NAMED HPEIF HOLDINGS 1 LIMITED)

Enforcement of the SIAC final award dated 27.09.2014 was upheld because (i) the narrow international standard of public policy applies and the threshold for refusal is that enforcement would violate the most basic notions of morality or justice, (ii) allegations of bias must be assessed by international standards (with due regard to the seat) and are ordinarily to be raised in the seat of arbitration, (iii) the appellants did not raise a timely setting‑aside challenge in Singapore nor establish on the high threshold required that Mr. Christopher Lau had a disclosable conflict under the IBA Gu…

Source excerpt

  • Section 48 of arbitration and conciliation act, 1996
  • Seat of arbitration and supervisory jurisdiction
  • Iba guidelines on conflict of interest (2004)
  • Duty of disclosure by arbitrators
  • Timeliness of challenges to arbitral appointments
  • Section 9 proceedings
Read case analysis
Arbitration

M/S UNIBROS versus ALL INDIA RADIO

The Second Award conflicted with the public policy of India because the Arbitrator ignored the High Court's limited remand direction and again awarded loss of profit without credible evidence of lost opportunities or profits; an award based on no evidence is patently illegal and perverse and thus can be set aside under section 34(2)(b).

Source excerpt

  • Loss of profit
  • Hudson's formula
  • Section 34(2)(b)
  • Remand for reconsideration
  • Arbitral award set aside
Read case analysis
Arbitration and conciliation act, 1996

BATLIBOI ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS LIMITED versus HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER

The arbitral award was set aside because the tribunal failed to give adequate reasons, adopted a one-sided and contradictory approach in computing damages (resulting in overlapping/part-double payments and an exorbitant award), and thereby the award was unsustainable and properly set aside by the High Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 37 read with Section 34 of the A&C Act.

Source excerpt

  • Setting aside arbitral award
  • Computation of damages for delay
  • Use of hudson/emden/eichleay formulae
  • Scope of judicial interference under section 34
  • Mitigation of loss
  • Bank guarantee reduction
Read case analysis
Arbitration

M/S ALPINE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION PVT. LTD. versus ASHOK S DHARIWAL AND OTHERS

Where arbitration proceedings and the award pre-dated the 2019 amendment, the pre-amendment s.34(2)(a) (requiring the applicant to 'furnish proof') applies; summary s.34 proceedings ordinarily proceed on the arbitral record but in exceptional cases matters not in the arbitral record that are relevant to s.34(2)(a) may be placed before the court by affidavits of both parties (with cross-examination allowed only if absolutely necessary); a challenge under s.34(2)(b) (public policy/non-arbitrability) can be raised in a Section 34 proceeding and need not await execution; on the facts a strong exc…

Source excerpt

  • Section 34(2)(a) pre-amendment
  • Section 34(2)(b)
  • 2019 amendment (act 33/2019)
  • Admissibility of additional evidence in s.34 proceedings
  • Execution vs. setting aside awards
Read case analysis
Arbitration

VIDYA DROLIA AND OTHERS versus DURGA TRADING CORPORATION

Sections 8 and 11 have the same, narrowly limited ambit: courts at the reference/appointment stage may only undertake a restricted, prima facie review of the existence/validity of an arbitration agreement and should refer the matter to arbitration in case of doubt. Judicial interference at that stage is justified only where it is manifestly and ex facie certain that (a) no valid arbitration agreement exists, or (b) the disputes are non-arbitrable under a four-fold test (actions in rem not reducible to in personam, disputes affecting third-party/erga omnes rights or requiring centralized adjud…

Source excerpt

  • Arbitrability
  • Jurisdiction
  • Separability
  • Competence-competence
  • Prima facie review
  • Interpretation of arbitration agreement
Read case analysis
Arbitration

GOVERNMENT OF INDIA versus 1.VEDANTA LIMITED (FORMERLY CAIRN INDIA LTD.) 2. RAVVA OIL (SINGAPORE) PTE. LTD. 3. VIDEOCON INDUSTRIES LIMITED

The enforcement/execution petition under ss.47 and 49 is governed by Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (three years from when the right to apply accrues); the enforcement court has limited power to refuse enforcement under s.48 and cannot set aside a foreign award on merits (power to annul resides with courts at the seat); the 2016 amendments to s.48 are substantive and prospective; on the facts the award did not contravene Indian public policy and enforcement was upheld.

Source excerpt

  • Enforcement of foreign arbitral awards
  • Limitation period for enforcement
  • Section 48 public policy defence
  • Lex fori and lex arbitri
  • Legal fiction of deemed decree
Read case analysis
Arbitration

NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIA versus ALIMENTA S.A.

The contract expressly provided in Clause 14 that a government prohibition would cancel the unfulfilled portion; because NAFED, as a canalizing agency, lacked government permission to export in the subsequent season the contingency occurred and the contract became void under Section 32 of the Contract Act; enforcement of the foreign award requiring NAFED to pay damages would therefore be contrary to the fundamental policy of Indian law and public policy under Section 7(1)(b)(ii) of the Foreign Awards Act, and the award is unenforceable.

Source excerpt

  • Foreign awards (recognition and enforcement) act, 1961 s.7
  • Indian contract act s.32
  • Indian contract act s.56
  • Public policy defence to enforcement of foreign awards
  • Enforceability of international arbitral awards
Read case analysis
Arbitration

VIJAY KARIA & ORS. versus PRYSMIAN CAVI E SISTEMI SRL & ORS.

Section 48 of the Arbitration Act must be construed narrowly and affords limited grounds to refuse enforcement of foreign awards; the phrase "was otherwise unable to present his case" is confined to denial of a fair hearing at the hearing stage and requires factors outside the party’s control to have denied a fair opportunity; rectifiable breaches of FEMA/Rules do not constitute violation of the fundamental policy of Indian law; the Supreme Court under Article 136 will not ordinarily re-open or re-weigh merits of foreign awards enforced by High Courts and will interfere only in exceptional ca…

Source excerpt

  • Section 48, arbitration and conciliation act, 1996
  • Natural justice (audi alteram partem)
  • Recognition and enforcement under new york convention, 1958
  • Scope of appellate jurisdiction under article 136
  • Post-award challenges and discretion to enforce
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.