Section 37, LLP Section 24(5), books of account under the BSA 2023, appeals without a stay and adverse inference in retiring partner account disputes in India.

How the Section 14 IBC moratorium affects pending and new arbitration proceedings: whether arbitrations are stayed, enforcement of awards during CIRP, the clean slate principle on plan approval, and what claimants must do to preserve their rights.

A tortious claim connected to a contract is arbitrable in India if resolving it requires reference to the contract, under the wide definition of arbitration agreement in Section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, covering disputes arising from a defined legal relationship whether contractual or not. It is not arbitrable where the claim is a right in rem, enforceable against persons outside the arbitration agreement. This article examines the statutory basis for

Under Section 38(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, an arbitral tribunal's advance deposit toward costs must be paid in equal shares by each party, not split 50:50 between the claimant side and the respondent side. In a reference with one claimant and three respondents, each of the four parties owes 25 percent of the deposit, not 50 percent apiece. Institutional rules such as the ICC's often use claimant and respondent shorthand instead, which does not carry ov

A practical guide to filing a Section 9 interim relief application before the Bombay High Court under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

A partner who retires from a firm or a limited liability partnership rarely walks away with a cheque in hand. What follows is usually a contested settlement of accounts, and throughout that period the continuing partners hold every asset, every bank mandate and every ledger on which the retiring partner's claim depends. Interim relief in such a dispute is often the only thing standing between a good claim and a worthless award. What follows sets out the categories of interim

Commercial arbitration seated in Mumbai is governed procedurally by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, with the Bombay High Court exercising supervisory jurisdiction over interim relief, tribunal appointment, and challenges to awards. Parties choose Mumbai because its Commercial Division judges regularly handle Section 9, 11, and 34 applications, and because the Mumbai Centre for International Arbitration offers institutional administration in the same city. Ad hoc a

The law governing an arbitration agreement determines its validity, interpretation, and scope, and can differ from the law governing the main contract, a consequence of separability codified in Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The UK Supreme Court in Enka Insaat ve Sanayi A.S. v. OOO Insurance Company Chubb [2020] UKSC 38 held that, absent an express choice, the law with the closest connection to the arbitration agreement governs, usually the seat's l

Section 23 of the Evidence Act (now Section 21 of the BSA) bars without prejudice admissions from evidence, but the bar is not absolute. This post sets out the exceptions Indian courts recognise, from proving a concluded settlement to the narrow "unambiguous impropriety" exception, and explains why arbitral tribunals apply the rule more loosely than courts bound by the Evidence Act.

A multi-tier dispute resolution clause requires parties to attempt negotiation or mediation before commencing arbitration, and under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Indian courts enforce such a step as a condition precedent to arbitration only when the clause uses mandatory language rather than permissive language. The Supreme Court's reasoning in M/s Hyder Consulting (UK) Ltd. v. Governor, State of Orissa (2015) 2 SCC 189 confirms that courts give effect to an ag

Where an arbitration clause does not name a seat, Indian courts determine it from the parties' intention, shown through institutional rules, the governing law of the contract, and whether a named city was the seat or merely the venue, applying the framework the Supreme Court of India set out in Union of India v. Hardy Exploration and Production (India) Inc. (2019) 13 SCC 472. The seat is a legal concept distinct from the venue: it fixes the courts with supervisory jurisdictio

Section 31(7) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 governs interest on arbitral awards in India across three components: pre-award interest for the period before the award is made, post-award interest running from the date of the award until payment, and the tribunal's discretion to compound either. Unless the parties have agreed otherwise, the tribunal decides the rate and period for pre-award interest, while post-award interest defaults to two percent above the cur

The appropriate arbitration seat for an Asia-Pacific dispute depends on the governing law of the underlying contract, the need for urgent interim relief, and whether speed matters more than procedural scrutiny, rather than on any single seat being universally superior. Singapore under the Singapore International Arbitration Centre, London under the London Court of International Arbitration, and Paris under the International Chamber of Commerce each apply a different lex arbit

Although financial institutions usually prefer instituting proceedings under SARFAESI Act or the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, in many cases they are left with no option but to pursue arbitration. Arbitration has become the default dispute resolution mechanism for Indian banks and NBFCs, particularly in loan recovery, restructuring disputes, consortium lending, g uarantee enforcement, and fintech partnerships. However, despite the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 being