Legal Reference Library

Delhi High Court has said that while courts have the power to issue injunction against arbitration proceedings, they should use it rarely. A bench of justices Badar Durrez Ahmed and Sanjeev Sachdeva said courts need to remind themselves that the trend was to minimise interference with arbitration which was the "forum of choice". "Courts must be extremely circumspect and, indeed, reluctant to thwart arbitration proceedings. Thus, while courts in India may have the power to injunct arbitration proceedings, they must exercise that power rarely and only on principles analogous to those found in sections 8 and 45, as the case may be, of the Arbitration Act of 1996," the court said. Section 8 and 45 of the Act provide the circumstances under which judicial authorities can refer parties to arbitration. "Courts need to remind themselves that the trend is to minimize interference with arbitration process as that is the forum of choice," the bench said. The observat...

The Full Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab has upheld the correctness of the law laid down in B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another [(2003) 4 SCC 675], Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another [(2008) 9 SCC 677] and Manoj Sharma v. State and others [(2008) 16 SCC 1] The matter was referred to a larger bench by a 2 judge bench comprising of Justice Markandey Katju and Justice Gyan Sudha Mishra, who had doubted the law laid down in B.S. Joshi, Nikhil Merchant and Manoj Sharma (supra). The reference order read as follows: “Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner has been convicted under Section 420 and Section 120B, IPC by the learned Magistrate. He filed an appeal challenging his conviction before the learned Sessions Judge. While his appeal was pending, he filed an application before the learned Sessions Judge for compounding the offence, which, according to the learned counsel, was directed to be take...