SC: ‘Abandonment of Service is Not Voluntary Retirement’, Denying SBI Clerk Pension Benefits  ||  Supreme Court: Stranger Affected by an Interim Order is Entitled to be Impleaded in Writ Proceedings  ||  Supreme Court: Courts Cannot Replace an Authority’s Discretion, and Sets Aside Direction to Governor  ||  SC: Title Suit Hit by Constructive Res Judicata if Omitted in Prior Injunction Suit Disputing Title  ||  SC Clarifies Whether a Co-Operative Society Can Act as a Resolution Applicant under the IBC  ||  Chhattisgarh High Court: Innocent Litigants Should Not be Penalized For Lapses by Their Lawyers  ||  Delhi High Court: Marriage With the Victim Cannot Absolve an Accused of Rape under POCSO  ||  J&K&L HC: Acquisition Lapses if 80% Compensation is Unpaid Before Possession under Section 17A  ||  Delhi HC: Policy Number is Not Mandatory For LIC Details under RTI, But Basic Details are Required  ||  SC: Courts Must Curb Unlicensed Money Lenders; Probes Need Not Wait For New Law    

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