Consumer Court Directs Amazon, Seller to Pay Rs.4.68 Lakh to Customer as Compensation  ||  MP HC: Pension is a Proprietary Right and Cannot be Withheld unless Grave Misconduct is Proved  ||  HP High Court: ITBP Constable Removal For Affair Disproportionate; Orders Compulsory Retirement  ||  Calcutta High Court: Trade Licence Not Required For Advocates’ Partnership Registration  ||  Supreme Court: Courts Cannot Compel Plaintiffs to Accept Compensation Instead of Injunctions  ||  Delhi HC: Saying “Maro Sale Ko” During a Fight Alone Does Not by Itself Establish Intent to Kill  ||  Delhi HC Ordered Removal of Fake News About Judges’ London Badminton Event, Restrained its Sharing  ||  Bombay HC: Calling Police over Routine Transfers or External Complaints is Misconduct  ||  Delhi HC Upheld EC’s Decision Banning Political Ads in the Delhi Metro During Model Code of Conduct  ||  Delhi HC: In the Telegram Case Entire Social Media Platforms Can Be Blocked U/S 69A of the IT Act    

Armada (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. v. Ashapura Minechem Ltd. - (High Court of Bombay) (08 Sep 2015)

Execution of arbitration of arbitral award impermissible without permission of BIFR

MANU/MH/2374/2015

Arbitration

Mere violation of Indian law is not sufficient to raise an objection for enforcement of the foreign award under Section 48 of the Arbitration Act, 1996. In a case where Petitioner sought execution of awards made by a foreign arbitrator, the Court held that though the awards were decreed, the Petitioner could not go ahead the same without permission from the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, in violation of Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985.

Relevant : Section 22 Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 Act Tropic Shipping Company Limited vs. Kothari Global Limited MANU/MH/0790/2001 Penn Racquet Sports vs. Mayor International Ltd. MANU/DE/0147/2011

Tags : ARBITRATION   SICA   FOREIGN   BIFR  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved