#Execution of Arbitral Award

Kerala High Court rules that a counter-claim by one respondent against a co-respondent is maintainable under the arbitration agreement, overriding procedural limitations under the CPC. The decision clarifies that arbitration agreements prevail over technical objections, enabling broader dispute resolution in multi-party commercial disputes.

The Calcutta High Court has ruled that executing courts lack authority to alter the interest period or amount specified in a final arbitral award, even if the debtor claims a bona fide dispute. This upholds the sanctity of arbitral awards under Section 36 ACA and prevents collateral challenges during enforcement, directly impacting award holders seeking precise recovery and debtors attempting to renegotiate terms post-award.

Bombay High Court rules that an arbitral award based on unilateral arbitrator appointment is void ab initio and unenforceable, even at the execution stage. Parties are granted liberty to initiate fresh arbitration, with the limitation period excluded from the date of arbitration invocation. This reinforces the Supreme Court’s stance in Bhadra International on procedural fairness in arbitration.