Topic
Indian law governs the SAP support contract, the Delhi High Court held, rejecting the defendant's claim that EU sanctions excuse performance absent proof and ordering restoration of services to keep the refinery running.
The Bombay High Court held that the clause 'Arbitration Subject to Mumbai Jurisdiction' in a purchase order constitutes a valid arbitration agreement under Section 7, even though it lacks mandatory referential language or procedural machinery. The court appointed a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6), affirming that minimalist clauses can satisfy the statutory threshold for arbitration agreements in commercial contracts.
The Bombay High Court ruled that a party cannot obtain an interim mandatory injunction to revive a determinable contract; the dispute must proceed to arbitration, with the Rs 1 lakh caution money kept in escrow. This curtails injunctive relief in commercial contracts and reinforces arbitration clauses.
Even without signing the MoS, a shareholder named in its schedule is deemed a veritable party and can be forced into arbitration under the Arbitration Act. The decision widens arbitration’s reach to parties whose performance is essential to a deal. It affects buyers, sellers and related stakeholders in corporate share-purchase transactions.
The Supreme Court ruled that security deposits under commercial contracts do not accrue interest unless refunded beyond the agreed period, reinforcing contractual sanctity while ensuring equitable relief for delayed refunds. This judgment clarifies the enforceability of explicit no-interest clauses in contracts, impacting contractors and government entities alike.
The Bombay High Court set aside a Lok Adalat award imposing 9% and 15% monthly interest on an insurance claim, ruling that such an interpretation directly contradicts the unambiguous language of the tripartite agreement, which only references 9% and 15% without specifying monthly compounding. This reinforces that contractual interpretation in insurance disputes must adhere strictly to textual precision, not speculative extrapolation - a critical warning to arbitral forums and insurers alike.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that arbitral tribunals cannot award loss of profits without concrete evidence, even if contract foreclosure was unlawful. The decision underscores that findings of fact in arbitration are binding unless perverse, rejecting a Rs. 4.38 crore claim for lack of proof. Contractors and businesses must now ensure robust documentation to sustain damages claims in arbitration.
Bombay High Court rules that arbitration clauses in main contracts do not automatically bind subcontractors unless specifically incorporated. The court dismissed an application for arbitrator appointment, emphasizing that general references to the main contract's terms are insufficient for subcontract disputes. This sets a precedent for strict compliance in commercial agreements.