Between The Lines – Page 23 – Vaish Associates Advocates

Between the Lines | Delhi High Court: An arbitral award cannot be interfered with on account of disagreement over inference drawn from evidence

The Delhi High Court (“DHC”) has in its judgment dated April 15, 2021, in the matter of Megha Enterprises and Others v. M/s Haldiram Snacks Private Limited [O.M.P (COMM) 79/2021], held that an arbitral award cannot be interfered with on account of disagreement over inference drawn from evidence. Facts Megha Enterprises (“Petitioner”), engaged in the […]

Between the Lines | Calcutta High Court: Award-holder’s claim will stand extinguished on approval of award-debtor’s resolution plan under Section 31 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016

The Calcutta High Court (“CHC”) has in its judgment dated May 7, 2021, in the matter of Sirpur Paper Mills Limited v. I.K. Merchants Private Limited (Formerly Known as I.K. Merchants) [A.P. 550 of 2008] (“Judgement”), held that the claim of the arbitral award-holder will be frustrated once the resolution plan of the award-debtor is […]

Between the Lines | Supreme Court: Entries made in balance sheet amount to acknowledgement of debt for the purpose of extending limitation under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”) has in its judgment dated April 15, 2021 (“Judgement”), in the matter of Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Limited v. Bishal Jaiswal & Another [Civil Appeal No.323/2021], held that entries in balance sheets amount to acknowledgement of debt for the purpose of extending limitation under Section 18 of the Limitation Act, […]

Between the Lines | Supreme Court: Refusal to condone delay under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is appealable under Section 37 of the said Act

The Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”) by its judgment in Chintels India Limited v. Bhayana Builders Private Limited [Civil Appeal No. 4028 of 2020], on February 11, 2021, held that refusal to condone delay under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“1996 Act”) was appealable under Section 37 of the 1996 Act. Facts […]

Between the Lines | Supreme Court: Insolvency process maintainable against Corporate Guarantor even if principal borrower is not a ‘Corporate Person’

The Supreme Court (“SC”) has in its judgment dated March 26, 2021, in the matter of Laxmi Pat Surana v. Union Bank of India and Another [Civil Appeal No. 2734 of 2020], held that a principal borrower need not be a ‘corporate person’ where insolvency proceedings are initiated against a company which acted as the […]

Between the Lines | Supreme Court: An application seeking reference to arbitration under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is not maintainable, if filed after admission of an insolvency resolution petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code

The Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”) has in its judgment dated March 26, 2021 (“Judgement”), in the matter of Indus Biotech Private Limited v. Kotak India Venture (Offshore) Fund and Others [Arbitration Petition No.48 of 2019 with Civil Appeal No.1070/2021 arising out of SLP (C) NO. 8120 OF 2020], held that an application seeking reference to […]