Back
PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, R. MAHADEVAN
Jagdeep Chowgule – Appellant
Versus
Sheela Chowgule – Respondent
The Sections applied in the given judgment include Section 29A, which deals with the time limits for arbitral awards and the extension of such periods (!) (!) (!) (!) , Section 2(1)(e), which defines the term "Court" for the purposes of arbitration proceedings (!) (!) , and Section 42, which pertains to the jurisdiction of courts in arbitration matters (!) (!) (!) .
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. questions referred for authoritative determination. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. background of the arbitration dispute. (Para 4 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 3. question of filing under section 29a. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. interpretation of section 29a's jurisdiction. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 5. clarification on the definition of 'court' under section 2(1)(e). (Para 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 6. conclusion to restore commercial court's earlier judgment. (Para 27 , 28) |
JUDGMENT :
1. Leave granted.
2. The following two questions were referred by the Single Judge of High Court of Bombay at Goa1[Vide order dated 15.04.2024 in Writ Petition No. 88 of 2024 filed by Respondent No.1, against of order of the Commercial Court in CMA No. 20/2023/A allowing application under Section 2 9A by Respondent no. 2.] to the Division Bench of the High Court for authoritative determination.
3. The Division Bench2[Vide order dated 07.08.2024.] answered the reference in the following manner.
4. Following reference of the Division Bench, the learned Single Judge allowed writ petition3[Vide order dated 21.08.2024.] filed by the respondent no.1 and quashed the order passed by the Commercial Court extending the time for mak
The Supreme Court clarified jurisdictional complexities regarding applications for extension of time for arbitral awards under Section 29A, emphasizing specific court roles based on how arbitrators a....
The term 'Court' in Section 29A of the Arbitration Act must be interpreted contextually, allowing only the appointing court (High Court/Supreme Court) to exercise powers under this section, including....
The High Court has jurisdiction to extend the mandate of arbitrators appointed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act, ensuring adherence to party autonomy and minimal court intervention.
The court clarified that applications for extending the mandate of an arbitral tribunal under Section 29A must be filed before the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction, not the High Court.
The High Court has exclusive authority to extend the mandate of an arbitrator appointed under Section 11 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, regardless of the pecuniary value of the claim.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the term 'Court' in Section 29-A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 should be interpreted in the context of the power to appoint an....
The court affirmed that the term 'Court' under Section 29A of the Arbitration Act is exhaustively defined, limiting powers to specified civil courts, with definitive precedents clarifying that High C....
The High Court has jurisdiction to extend time for arbitration proceedings, provided the arbitrator was appointed by it, reflecting legislative intent requiring contextual interpretation of 'Court' i....
The court determines jurisdiction under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and concludes the petition is not maintainable.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
