Supreme Court: Borrowers Retain Redemption Rights if Balance is Paid After Auction Deadline  ||  Supreme Court: Non-Confirmation of Seizure under Section 37A Impacts Adjudication Proceedings  ||  SC: Blacklisting After Contract Termination is Not Automatic and Needs Independent Review  ||  Grand Venice Fraud Case: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Satinder Singh Bhasin  ||  SC: Senior Employee Cannot Claim Same Lesser Penalty As Subordinate; Bank Manager's Dismissal Upheld  ||  Madras HC: Governor Must Follow Cabinet's Advice on Remission Decisions, Regardless of Personal View  ||  Kerala High Court: Entrepreneurs Must Be Protected From Baseless Protests to Boost Industrial Growth  ||  J&K&L High Court: Second FIR Valid if it Reveals a Broader Conspiracy; 'Test of Sameness' is Key  ||  Supreme Court: Expecting a Minor to Respond to a Public Court Notice is ‘Perverse’  ||  SC: Order 23 Rule 1 CPC Applies to S. 11 Arbitration Act, Barring Fresh Arbiration After Abandonment    

Cal. HC: Court Must Interfere with Arbitrator’s Interim Orders Only When it is Palpably Perverse - (28 Nov 2023)

ARBITRATION

Calcutta High Court has observed that Section 37 Court in appeal must see an interim order passed by arbitral tribunal within prismatic efficacy of the statutory purpose in that the court would only intervene where the exercise of discretion is palpably perverse and patently unconscionable.

Tags : CALCUTTA HIGH COURT   INTERIM ORDERS   SECTION 37  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved