Topic

Execution of Awards

4 articlesLatest September 2026
Section 36 Arbitration Act | Limitation for Execution Runs From 2015 Amendment, Not Award Date, As Pre-Amendment Law Foreclosed Execution : Calcutta HC
|Calcutta High Court

Section 36 Arbitration Act | Limitation for Execution Runs From 2015 Amendment, Not Award Date, As Pre-Amendment Law Foreclosed Execution : Calcutta HC

Limitation for executing a 2008 arbitral award runs from 23 October 2015, when amended Section 36 made awards immediately enforceable, not the award date. Pre-amendment law required the Section 34 challenge period to expire first, blocking execution for seven years per National Aluminium. The ruling shields award holders from statutory gaps that delayed enforcement.

Pre-2015 Unilateral Arbitrator Appointments Valid When Agreement Names or Authorises Appointment | Section 12(5) of Arbitration Act 1996 : Bombay HC
Case Law Analysis
|Bombay High Court

Pre-2015 Unilateral Arbitrator Appointments Valid When Agreement Names or Authorises Appointment | Section 12(5) of Arbitration Act 1996 : Bombay HC

Appointments of arbitrators made unilaterally before the 23 Oct 2015 amendment are not void, provided the arbitration agreement either names the arbitrator or permits one party to appoint. Only appointments lacking any contractual basis are set aside. This clarifies the enforceability of older arbitral clauses for parties and courts handling award execution.

Post-Decretal Interest Under J&K Arbitration Act 1945 | Principal Sum Excludes Pre-Reference & Pendente Lite Interest : J&K & Ladakh HC
Case Law Analysis
|Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court

Post-Decretal Interest Under J&K Arbitration Act 1945 | Principal Sum Excludes Pre-Reference & Pendente Lite Interest : J&K & Ladakh HC

J&K & Ladakh HC clarifies that post-decretal interest on arbitral awards under the J&K Arbitration Act, 1945, is calculable only on the principal sum, excluding pre-reference and pendente lite interest. This ruling diverges from the broader interpretation permitted under the State CPC, impacting execution of awards in arbitration disputes.

Co-sharers Entitled to Equal Compensation Without Filing Section 18 or 28-A Objections | Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Punjab & Haryana HC
Case Law Analysis
|Punjab and Haryana High Court

Co-sharers Entitled to Equal Compensation Without Filing Section 18 or 28-A Objections | Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Punjab & Haryana HC

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has ruled that co-sharers in acquired land are entitled to the same compensation as other co-owners, even if they never filed objections under Sections 18 or 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. This removes a procedural barrier for beneficiaries of land acquisition awards, ensuring equitable treatment regardless of litigation participation.