Payal Chawla Last year, the decision in the matter of Indus Mobile Distribution Pvt. Ltd v. Datawind Innovations Pvt. Ltd. [(2017) 7 SCC 678] was delivered by the Supreme Court. This decision was welcomed from the perspective of bringing quietus to the jurisdiction issue in domestic arbitration, and yet at the same time, criticized inter alia for being in the…
Payal Chawla and Hina Shaheen The appointment of an arbitrator by one party to an arbitration agreement has been a vexed issue. The pre-amended Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Act”) permitted such appointments, with certain limited exceptions. That these unilateral appointments have been the cause of much angst and litigation is not in dispute. The…
Payal Chawla and Aastha Bhardwaj Originally appeared in Bar & Bench, 19.12.2017 As arbitrations enhance in India, so will arbitration claims and their quantum. There will be a consequent rise in arbitration costs, be it legal fees, arbitrators’ fees, security on costs, and/or costs payable by the unsuccessful party. Arbitral costs can be exorbitant, and…
Payal Chawla This article was first published in Bar and Bench on 17.11.2017 In India, while the contracts of indemnity are perhaps the most negotiated clauses in a contract, they are paradoxically the least litigated. The paucity of legal precedence on this subject may be one of the reasons, despite some early pronouncements on the…
Payal Chawla It is common knowledge that an arbitral tribunal is not bound by the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. This is enshrined in s.19(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (ACA). S.19(1) has sometimes been misunderstood as to its scope and whether the Code and the Evidence…
Payal Chawla In a welcome recent decision of Indus Mobile Distribution Pvt. Ltd. v. Datawind Innovations Pvt. Ltd. [(2017) 7 SCC 678], the Hon’ble Supreme Court provided the much-needed clarity on the juridical seat in relation to domestic arbitration. Brief facts of Indus Mobile: The appellant (Indus Mobile) and respondent No. 1 (Datawind Innovations) entered into a contract whereby…
Payal Chawla and Hina Shaheen This article was first published in Bar and Bench on 22.08.2017 On July 24, 2017, the Supreme Court, in the matter of Ameet Lal Chand v. Rishabh Enterprises [SLP (C) 16798/2017], was pleased to issue notice. The judgment in this matter is likely to have far reaching consequences. In addition to arbitrability…
Payal Chawla The purpose of arbitrating a dispute is to avoid a protracted court battle. But that purpose can oft be defeated, if the parties get caught in a dispute on the interpretation of the arbitration clause itself. Therefore, it is important to keep the arbitration clause simple, only incorporating essential aspects. An example of…