Violation of tribunal’s orders can lead to contempt proceedings

0
3031
LinkedIn
Facebook
Twitter
Whatsapp
Telegram
Copy link

The Supreme Court recently held that an arbitral tribunal can make representation to a high court for contempt if any of its orders or interim orders are violated.

In Alka Chandewar v Shamshul Israr Khan, despite the interim orders passed by a sole arbitrator under section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which directed that no further flats were to be disposed of without the leave of the arbitral tribunal, Khan transferred five such flats in breach of the order. The arbitrator referred the contempt of the order to Bombay High Court to pass necessary orders under section 27(5) of the 1996 act.

Bombay High Court, however, held that section 27(5) empowers the arbitral tribunal to make representation to the high court for contempt only if there is any failure in respect of proceedings for taking evidence, and the tribunal has no such power in respect of any other order or interim order.

You must be a subscribersubscribersubscribersubscriber to read this content, please subscribesubscribesubscribesubscribe today.

For group subscribers, please click here to access.
Interested in group subscription? Please contact us.

你需要登录去解锁本文内容。欢迎注册账号。如果想阅读月刊所有文章,欢迎成为我们的订阅会员成为我们的订阅会员

已有集团订阅,可点击此处继续浏览。
如对集团订阅感兴趣,请联络我们

The dispute digest is compiled by Bhasin & Co, Advocates, a corporate law firm based in New Delhi. The authors can be contacted at lbhasin@bhasinco.in or lbhasin@gmail.com. Readers should not act on the basis of this information without seeking professional legal advice.

LinkedIn
Facebook
Twitter
Whatsapp
Telegram
Copy link