Chhattisgarh HC: Complaints Without Disciplinary Action Cannot Affect a Judge's Seniority  ||  Delhi HC Upholds Selection of India's Dressage Team For the 2026 Asian Games  ||  MP High Court Orders State to Airlift Gas Pipeline Blast Victim to Ahmedabad For Treatment  ||  Delhi HC: Memorandum of Past Oral Family Settlement Needs No Registration if No New Rights Arise  ||  Chhattisgarh HC: Denying Marriage in Live-In Relationship Does Not Constitute Rape  ||  Madhya Pradesh High Court: BSF Must Assess Criminal Charge Gravity Before Declaring Candidate Unfit  ||  Bihar Tender Scam: Patna High Court Bars Media From Calling Accused 'Scamster' Before Trial  ||  Gujarat HC Terms Plea ‘Wholly Misconceived’ and Imposes Rs. 2 Lakh Cost over ASI Somnath Survey  ||  Gauhati HC Differs on Whether ED’s ‘Reason To Believe’ For Property Attachment is Confidential  ||  MP High Court Grants Bail To Tehelka Journalist, Noting Implication After Exposing Foeticide Racket    

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