Listen to this post
When Policy Isn’t Law: Why Press Releases Don’t Trigger “Change in Law” Compensation

Summary: The Supreme Court’s ruling in Nabha Power v. PSPCL makes a clear distinction: government press releases and policy clarifications, even if they affect project economics, do not qualify as “Change in Law” under Power Purchase Agreements. Only formal legal instruments like statutes, rules, regulations, or gazette notifications carry the weight needed to trigger compensation. This brings greater certainty for regulators and distribution companies, but it also means developers must be more cautious when bidding, since informal policy signals can no longer be relied upon for relief. The decision ultimately reinforces contractual discipline while reminding the sector that policy announcements must be formally notified to have legal effect.

Continue Reading When Policy Isn’t Law: Why Press Releases Don’t Trigger “Change in Law” Compensation
Listen to this post
Supreme Court Clarifies the Trigger Point for Commencement of Arbitration under Indian Laws

Summary: The Supreme Court has addressed a long-standing issue in arbitration law, holding that the receipt of the arbitration notice marks the commencement of arbitral proceedings for the purposes of limitation period, interim reliefs, and procedural laws.

Continue Reading Supreme Court Clarifies the Trigger Point for Commencement of Arbitration under Indian Laws
Listen to this post
To Gift or Not To Gift: A Guide to Gifts and Hospitality to Indian Government Officials

Summary: Extending gifts and hospitality to Indian government officials, while culturally customary, presents significant legal and reputational risks under India’s anti-corruption framework. This article examines monetary thresholds, ministerial restrictions, and the practical implications of India’s anti-bribery law while providing organisations with actionable strategies to build the “adequate procedures” defence, which stands as the only statutory shield against corporate criminal liability.

Continue Reading To Gift or Not To Gift: A Guide to Gifts and Hospitality to Indian Government Officials
Listen to this post
Navigating Brand Endorsement Disputes

Summary: This blog examines the statutory and judicial framework governing various types of brand endorsement disputes in India, including consumer protection claims concerning misleading advertisements, endorser/brand ambassador liabilities and contractual disputes.

Continue Reading Navigating Brand Endorsement Disputes
Listen to this post
The MoRTH Circular to end arbitration in disputes over 10 crores: Unilateral Change or Contractual Overreach?

Summary: The Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) circular dated January 12, 2026, provides that arbitration will not be available for disputes exceeding INR 10 crore in BOT, HAM, and EPC contracts, purporting to replace existing dispute resolution clauses with immediate effect. This raises critical questions: Can a government circular unilaterally amend signed contracts that expressly require written consent for modifications? While prospective application may be defensible, retrospective substitution of dispute resolution mechanism, without mutual consent, presents serious enforceability concerns and challenges fundamental principles of contractual sanctity. The circular’s ambiguous carve-out for “ongoing arbitrations” adds further uncertainty, particularly about disputes at pre-arbitral stages. This development marks a significant departure from India’s pro-arbitration stance and warrants careful legal and policy scrutiny.

Continue Reading The MoRTH Circular to end arbitration in disputes over 10 crores: Unilateral Change or Contractual Overreach?
Listen to this post
No Turning Back: Supreme Court’s HCC v. BRPNNL Ruling Shuts the Door on Arbitration Sabotage

Summary: The Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in HCC v. BRPNNL has reset India’s arbitration landscape by emphasising that Section 11 appointments are definitive and not subject to further review, thereby slamming the brakes on procedural sabotage. In a case where three years of hearings were derailed by a belated challenge, the Hon’ble Supreme Court reaffirmed that arbitration agreements must be honoured, defects in appointment mechanisms must be cured without killing the clause, and participation without timely objection amounts to waiver. By insulating advanced arbitrations from endless detours, the judgment restores speed, reliability, and commercial focus to India’s dispute resolution framework, especially vital for the construction sector where delays and escalation claims are endemic.

Continue Reading No Turning Back: Supreme Court’s HCC v. BRPNNL Ruling Shuts the Door on Arbitration Sabotage
Listen to this post
Does mere existence of an Arbitration Agreement Sink a Plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the CPC?

Introduction

The interplay between civil procedure and arbitration law often raises nuanced questions related to jurisdiction and maintainability. A recurring concern is the attempt to seek rejection of a plaint on the ground that the dispute is governed by a legally valid and subsisting arbitration agreement.

Continue Reading Does mere existence of an Arbitration Agreement Sink a Plaint under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the CPC?
Listen to this post

Summary: This article is the second part of a two-part series, examining the implications of India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, on internal investigations conducted by organisations and their legal counsel. While Part I addressed the foundational framework and the applicability of exemptions under the DPDP Act, particularly Section 17(1)(c); Part II focuses on the practical compliance obligations that Data Fiduciaries must navigate during internal investigations, including security requirements, breach notification protocols, data retention and erasure mandates, and cross-border transfer complexities.

Continue Reading Implications Of The Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025:  Stoking Internal Investigations – Part II
Listen to this post
Cumulative Redeemable Preference Shareholders Cannot Trigger Insolvency Proceedings: Supreme Court

Summary: In EPC Constructions India Ltd. v. Matix Fertilizers & Chemicals Ltd., the Supreme Court addressed whether holders of non-cumulative redeemable preference shares can initiate insolvency proceedings under Section 7 of the IBC, as financial creditors. The Court held that preference shareholders are not creditors and cannot trigger insolvency proceedings, as preference shares remain part of the share capital even upon maturity, and conversion of debt into preference shares permanently extinguishes the original creditor relationship. This landmark judgement reinforces the fundamental distinction between debt and equity, clarifying that IBC remedies are available only to creditors and not shareholders.

Continue Reading Cumulative Redeemable Preference Shareholders Cannot Trigger Insolvency Proceedings: Supreme Court
Listen to this post
Implications Of The Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025:  Stoking Internal Investigations – Part I

Summary: India’s Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, effective November 13, 2025, have fundamentally transformed the regulatory landscape for internal investigations. This analysis is the first part in a two-part series examining the critical compliance challenges facing organisations and law firms navigating data-sensitive proceedings under the new regime.

Continue Reading Implications Of The Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025:  Stoking Internal Investigations – Part I