Back
PRATEEK JALAN
Kashmir Harvard Educational Institute – Appellant
Versus
President And Fellows of Harvard College – Respondent
JUDGMENT
IA. 14398/2023 (for exemption)
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
The application stands disposed of.
IA 14399/2023 (for condonation of delay)
1. The petitioner seeks condonation of delay of 25 days in filing of the petition. Although it has not been mentioned in the application, the record shows that a scanned copy of the award was received by the petitioner by an email of the Legal Officer of National Internet Exchange of India ["NIXI"] dated 06.04.2023. The period of three months for filing of the petition, provided under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ["the Act"], thus lapsed on 06.07.2023.
2. The petition, filed on 28.07.2023, was thus belated by approximately 22 days, which is within the maximum condonable period of 30 days under the proviso to Section 34(3) of the Act. The ground mentioned in the application is that the petitioner is based in "a remote area of Kashmir," and had to travel to Delhi to engage counsel.
3. As the delay is within the maximum condonable period, the application is allowed for the reasons stated, i
The court established that arbitration awards can only be set aside under Section 34 if they contravene fundamental principles of Indian law or public policy, without delving into the merits of arbit....
The judgment emphasizes the limited scope of judicial review of arbitral awards, the requirement to demonstrate patent illegality, and the principles of natural justice and a judicial approach in arb....
The judgment established the importance of protecting domain names and clarified the grounds for setting aside an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
The court upheld the arbitration award canceling a domain name for being confusingly similar to prior registered domain names, emphasizing the importance of preventing confusion in online commerce.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that claims of bias against an arbitrator must be carefully scrutinized, and an arbitrator should not rely upon evidence gathered without giving th....
Limited grounds for setting aside an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act and the Court's reluctance to re-adjudicate disputes on their merits.
The limited scope of intervention by Courts in arbitral awards under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing the need to satisfy specific grounds for setting aside an arbitral....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the significance of adhering to the prescribed limitation period under the Arbitration Act and the requirement for parties to exercise their rights....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of interference by the courts in arbitral awards and the specific grounds for challenging an arbitral award as laid down in the A....
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
