Where parties have negotiated and agreed Singapore as the seat of an arbitration and further agreed that the arbitration proceedings are to be conducted in accordance with the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) Rules, but where the agreement is governed by the laws of India, would an appeal under section 37 of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, against an interim order of the arbitrator be maintainable?
Considering the question in Yograj Infrastructure Ltd v Ssang Yong Engineering & Construction Co Ltd, the Supreme Court has held that in such a case, the law as laid down by the Supreme Court in Bhatia International v Bulk Trading SA would have no application and Part I of the Indian act, including the right to appeal under section 37, would be excluded.
Awarded a contract by the National Highways Authority of India, Ssang Yong Engineering & Construction Co (SY) subcontracted the work to Yograj Infrastructure. On account of delay in performance, SY terminated the subcontract with Yograj. Consequently, both parties filed applications under section 9 of the Indian act before a district judge seeking interim relief.
Bharucha & Partners Advocates & Solicitors
Cecil Court, 4th Floor, MK Bhushan Road
Tel: +91-22 2289 9300
Fax: +91-22 2282 3900