Dispute resolution

Arbitration Timelines in India “Justice delayed is justice denied — but what if delay is disguised as procedure?”

Summary: In Krishna Devi v. Union of India, the Supreme Court held that the limitation period to challenge an arbitral award begins when a party becomes aware of the award — not when formal notice is received. This ruling curbs delaying tactics and prioritises substance over procedure. Though rooted in the 1940 Act, it signals a shift in interpreting timelines under the 1996 regime, urging parties to act on knowledge, not wait for paperwork.Continue Reading Knowledge Over Notice: Rethinking Arbitration Timelines in India “Justice delayed is justice denied — but what if delay is disguised as procedure?”

Alternate remedy no bar to High Courts exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court

Summary: Commonly (mis)understood to be only a power of quashing, Section 482 CrPC (now Section 528 BNSS) is much broader in ambit. The Section recognises the inherent jurisdiction High Courts in India have in dealing with criminal matters, including the power to prevent abuse of process of “any court” or pass orders to “secure the ends of justice”.Continue Reading Alternate remedy no bar to High Courts exercising inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court

Nascent stage of investigation no bar for quashing: Supreme Court clarifies High Court’s power under Section 528 BNSS

Summary: The power to quash a criminal matter under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 482, CrPC, 1973), is well settled. It is a power to be exercised sparingly, within well accepted parameters, including no offence being disclosed, malice, abuse of criminal process, etc. If such relevant factors otherwise stand fulfilled, there is no bar to quashing an FIR, even if the investigation is at a preliminary/ nascent stage.Continue Reading Nascent stage of investigation no bar for quashing: Supreme Court clarifies High Court’s power under Section 528 BNSS

Beyond Approval: Decoding The Committee of Creditors’ Continuing Role Under the IBC

Summary: The article addresses a critical unanswered question in Indian insolvency law: whether the Committee of Creditors (CoC) becomes functus officio after NCLT approval of a resolution plan under Section 31 of the IBC, a question with significant academic and practical implications. Through harmonious interpretation of existing provisions, the authors argue that the CoC remains in existence until the Supreme Court finally decides on any questions pertaining to the resolution plan, as the corporate insolvency resolution process continues through the appellate hierarchy. However, while inferential support exists for this position, urgent legislative intervention is needed to provide an explicit statutory framework defining the CoC’s post-approval powers and to eliminate the current legal uncertainty.Continue Reading Beyond Approval: Decoding The Committee of Creditors’ Continuing Role Under the IBC

Loss of Profits vs. Loss of Profitability in Construction Contracts: Navigating the Legal Maze for Accurate Claims

Summary: The Indian construction industry has long grappled with a fundamental confusion that has cost contractors millions in unrecovered damages. The terms “profits” and “profitability” have frequently been used interchangeably by the legal community in India when addressing cases related to damages from contractual breaches. However, the two stand as distinct concepts and conflating them can lead to confusion or raise questions on legitimacy. Recent judicial developments, however, are finally bringing much-needed clarity to this critical distinction.Continue Reading Loss of Profits vs. Loss of Profitability in Construction Contracts: Navigating the Legal Maze for Accurate Claims

Expert Witnesses in International Arbitration: Untangling Complexity or Adding to the Cacophony?

Summary: This article examines the role of expert witnesses in international arbitration, highlighting their potential to clarify complex technical issues and assist tribunals in decision-making. However, it also critiques the challenges posed by party-appointed experts who may lack neutrality, and tribunal-appointed experts who may overstep their roles. The article discusses how expert reports often become overly complex and contradictory, hindering rather than helping the arbitration process. To address these issues, it proposes structured protocols, ethical standards, and innovative practices like “hot tubbing” and “expert teaming” to improve clarity, impartiality, and collaboration, ultimately aiming to make expert involvement a constructive force in arbitration.Continue Reading Expert Witnesses in International Arbitration: Untangling Complexity or Adding to the Cacophony?

Beyond the Signature: Who Gets a Seat at the Arbitration Table?

Summary: This blog clarifies the prior steps that must be taken before approaching a magistrate with an application under Section 156(3) CrPC- with reference to a recent judgement of the Supreme Court in Anurag Bhatnagar. We explain how the judgement in Anurag Bhatnagar ought not to be taken as a blanket exemption from the pursuing the prior steps.Continue Reading Steps under Section 154 CrPC no longer mandatory? Judgment in Anurag Bhatnagar-unique outlier or shift in jurisprudence?

Beyond the Signature: Who Gets a Seat at the Arbitration Table?

Summary: In a recent ruling, the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India has held that (a) non-signatories cannot attend arbitration proceedings, re-affirming the confidentiality mandate under Section 42A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Act”); and (b) a court becomes functus officio once an arbitrator is appointed under Section 11(6) of the Act. With Section 42A as its shield and the doctrine of functus officio as its sword, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has once again underscored that arbitration is not a spectator sport.Continue Reading Beyond the Signature: Who Gets a Seat at the Arbitration Table?

Absence of Due Diligence Not Money Laundering

Summary: The article highlights the powers of statutory auditors following the recent judgment, clarifying that statutory auditors cannot be held liable for money laundering solely because of lack of due diligence or negligence. The article also emphasises that criminal liability under PMLA requires clear evidence of collusion and that auditors are not expected to probe beyond their professional auditing role.Continue Reading Absence of Due Diligence Not Money Laundering

From Contracts to Chatbots: Navigating Justice in New-Age Disputes

Summary: At a recent thought leadership session on “Navigating Change: A Strategic Overview on Geopolitics, Regulation & AI”, our partner Ankoosh K. Mehta engaged in a lively conversation about New Age Disputes with Bhart Forge President and Group Counsel Vikram Munje. The article below is a synopsis of that discussion. Continue Reading From Contracts to Chatbots: Navigating Justice in New-Age Disputes