| Sl. No. |
PARTIES |
CITATION |
| 1 |
| Sundaram Finance Ltd. vs. NEPC India Ltd.
(Whether a party can approach a court for interim orders under
Section 9 even before commencement of arbitration proceedings
and before appointment of arbitrator) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(1999) 2 SCC 479 |
| 2 |
| Olympus Superstructures Pvt.Ltd. vs. Meena Vijay Khetan (Challenge to jurisdiction of arbitrator under Section 16) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(1999) 5 SCC 651 |
| 3 |
| Babar Ali vs. Union of India and others (Constitutional
validity of the Act of 1996) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2000) 2 SCC 178 |
| 4 |
| Khaleel Ahmed Dakhani vs. Hatti Gold Mines Co.Ltd.
(Even while the application to set aside the arbitral award
was pending in a Bangalore court under Section 34, the Appellant
filed an Execution Petition in Raichur Court to enforce the
arbitral award and attach the properties of the Respondent) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2000) 3 SCC 755 |
| 5 |
| Wellington Associates Ltd. vs. Kirit Mehta
(Whether Chief Justice or his designate can decide a challenge
to the
“existence” of the arbitration clause under Section
11 of the Act of 1996) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2000) 4 SCC 272 |
| 6 |
| P.Anand Gajapathi Raju and others vs. P.V.G.Raju
and others
(Whether an “arbitration agreement” mentioned in
Section 8 includes an arbitration agreement entered into during
the pendency of an action before a court) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2000) 4 SCC 539 |
| 7 |
| Skypak Couriers Ltd. vs. Tata Chemicals Ltd.
(Existence of an arbitration agreement is no bar to seek remedy
under the Consumer Protection Act) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2000) 5 SCC 294 |
| 8 |
| Haresh Dayaram Thakur vs. State of Maharashtra
( In terms of Section 73(3) the “ Settlement Agreement”
drawn up by the Conciliator should be signed by all the parties
to the dispute to be legally binding on the parties) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2000) 6 SCC 179 |
| 9 |
| Konkan Railway Corpn. Ltd. vs. Mehul Construction
Co.
(Whether the order of Chief Justice or his designate in appointing
an arbitrator under Section 11(6) is administrative or judicial
in nature) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2000) 7 SCC 201 |
| 10 |
| Nimet Resources Inc. and another vs. Essar Steels
Ltd
( Whether Chief Justice or his designate can decide a challenge
to the “existence” of the arbitration clause under
Section 11 or it is to be decided under Section 16 by the Arbitral
Tribunal itself) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2000) 7 SCC 497 |
| 11 |
| Datar Switchgears Ltd. vs. Tata Finance Ltd.
and another
( If a party to a dispute having received a notice from the
other party invoking the arbitration clause does not appoint
an arbitrator within the stipulated period of 30 days, does
he automatically forfeit his right to appoint an arbitrator
thereafter under Section 11) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2000) 8 SCC 151 |
| 12 |
| Konkan Railway Corpn. Ltd. vs. Rani Construction
Pvt.Ltd
(Whether the order of Chief Justice or his designate in appointing
an arbitrator
under Section 11(6) is administrative or judicial in nature) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2000) 8 SCC 159 |
| 13 |
| Manohar Lal vs. Umesh Anand and others
(Whether an arbitrator can be termed to a “court ”
within the meaning of Section
195 of the Criminal Procedure Code and whether the provisions
of Section 340
CrPC be made applicable to proceedings before an Arbitrator) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2001) 5 SCC 407 |
| 14 |
| Fuerst Day Lawson Ltd. vs. Jindal Exports Ltd
(Whether a “foreign award” given after the commencement
of the Act of 1996, but where the arbitration proceedings started
before the commencement of the Act of 1996, will be governed
by the Act of 1996. What is the effective date of
commencement of the Act of 1996) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2001) 6 SCC 356 |
| 15 |
| National Aluminium Co.Ltd. vs. Metalimpex Ltd
(If an arbitration agreement entered into between the parties
under the Arbitration Act, 1940, will the provisions of the
Act of 1996 be applicable to it in respect of arbitration proceedings
commenced on or after 25/1/1996) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2001) 6 SCC 372 |
| 16 |
| M.V.Baltic Confidence and another vs. State Trading
Corpn of India Ltd. and another
(Intention of the parties in incorporating an arbitration clause
is what is to be
considered and not a literal, pedantic and technical interpretation
of the clause) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2001) 7 SCC 473 |
| 17 |
| UPSEB vs. Banaras Electric Light & Power
Co.Ltd
(The Special Officer appointed by the Government of Uttar Pradesh
alone is competent to decide certain issues in view of authority
given to him under specific provisions of Indian Electricity
(U.P.Amendment and Validation) Act, 1975 and not the arbitrator
appointed by the Respondent) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2001) 7 SCC 637 |
| 18 |
| Smita Conductors Ltd. vs. Euro Alloys Ltd
(The contracts for supply of goods were not signed by the Appellant
and therefore the Appellant denied the existence of the arbitration
clause in view of the provisions of Article II(2) of New York
Convention) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2001) 7 SCC 728 |
| 19 |
| Union of India vs. Popular Construction Co
( Can the delay in filing an application to set aside the arbitral
award be condoned by a court under Section 5 of the Limitation
Act, 1963) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2001) 8 SCC 465 |
| 20 |
| Kalpana Kothari vs. Sudha Yadav and others
(As long as the arbitration clause exists, a party cannot take
recourse to the Civil Courts for appointment of Receiver etc.
without evincing an intention to start the arbitration proceedings)
|
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2002) 1 SCC 203 |
| 21 |
| S.W.Palanitkar and others vs. State of Bihar
(The effect of an arbitration clause in an Agreement when the
criminal proceedings have been initiated against the other parties
to the agreement) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2002) 1 SCC 241 |
| 22 |
| State of Rajasthan vs. Nav Bharat Construction
Co
(Objection to award of interest on delayed payments and other
issues not raised by the Appellant before the Arbitrator or
Courts below and hence not considered in this appeal) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2002) 1 SCC 659 |
| 23 |
| Konkan Railway vs. Rani Construction
(A Constitutional Bench has decided that the order of the Chief
Justice or his designate in appointing an arbitrator under Section
11 of the Act of 1996 is administrative in nature) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2002) 2 SCC 388 |
| 24 |
| Narayan Prasad Lohia vs. Nikunj Kumar Lohia and
others
(In terms of Section 10 the number of arbitrators “shall
not be an even number”. The parties to a dispute appoint
two arbitrators and participate in the arbitral proceedings.
Is the award delivered by the two arbitrators valid in law)
|
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2002) 3 SCC 572 |
| 25 |
| Bhatia International vs. Bulk Trading S.A. and
another
(In an international commercial arbitration taking place outside
India, can a party file a petition under Section 9 for an interim
order from a court in India) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2002) 4 SCC 105 |
| 26 |
| Build India Construction System vs. Union of
India
(The general conditions of contract were amended without obtaining
the consent of the Apellant and hence the amended arbitration
clause is not binding on the Appellant) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2002) 5 SCC 433 |
| 27 |
| ITI Ltd. vs. Siemens Public Communications Network
Ltd. (2002) 5 SCC 510
( In terms of Section 37(3) there is no provision of second
appeal against an order passed under Section 37. Whether a revision
petition under Section 115 of the Civil Procedure Code lies
to the High Court against an order made by a civil court in
an appeal filed under Section 37(2)(b)) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2002) 5 SCC 510 |
| 28 |
| W.B. State Warehousing Corpn. vs. Sushil Kumar
Kayan
(Under what circumstances can it be said that the arbitrator
has exceeded his jurisdiction) |
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2002) 5 SCC 679 |
| 29 |
| Grid Corpn. of Orissa Ltd. Vs. AES Corpn. and
others
(What are the essential requirements for appointment of a third
arbitrator by the two arbitrators appointed by the parties)
|
| Read
the Synopsis >> |
|
(2002) 7 SCC 736 |