Skip to main content

Indian courts can restrain foreign arbitration: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has said that Indian courts have the jurisdiction to restrain foreign arbitration cases from going ahead, but permitted a dispute over the Board of Control for Cricket in India's media rights between World Sport Group (Mauritius) and MSM Satellite (Singapore) to be decided by the Singapore-based International Chamber of Commerce (ICC).

A single judge of the Bombay High Court had on September 17, 2010 referred the row to the ICC for arbitration, but a division bench had stalled the process on an appeal. A two-judge top court bench, led by Justice AK Patnaik, restored the singlejudge order on January 24, 2014. The issue relates to the Indian Premier League's media rights. World Sport had first sought ICC arbitration.

The top court rejected the contention that because an agreement provided "that any party may seek equitable relief in a court of competent jurisdiction in Singapore, or such other court that may have jurisdiction over the parties, the Bombay HC had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit and restrain the arbitration proceedings."

It further said: "Under Section 9 of the CPC (Civil Procedure Code), courts in India have jurisdiction to try all suits of a civil nature excepting suits of which cognizance is either expressly or impliedly barred."

BCCI and MSM signed a fouryear media rights agreement in January 2008. After the first IPL season in 2008, BCCI terminated the agreement with MSM for the Indian subcontinent and began negotiations with WSG India.

Article referred: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/indian-courts-can-restrain-foreign-arbitration-supreme-court/articleshow/29431967.cms

Comments

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Owner of vehicle is not expected to verify the genuineness of the driving license before appointing a driver

Cause Title : Rishi Pal Singh Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 4919 Of 2022, The Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : July 26, 2022 Corum : Hemant Gupta; J., Vikram Nath; J. Background the truck owned by the appellant met with an accident. The owner deposed before the court that before employing the driver, he had taken his driving test and that he was driving the vehicle satisfactorily and  that the driver was employed with him for 3 years before the date of the accident. He produced his driving license. This was reaffirmed by the driver who deposed that the driving license was obtained from the driver and it was issued from Nagaland, but no such license was produced on record. Both the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the High Court have held that the owner has alleged that the driver had a driving license from Nagaland but the same was not produced and therefore, the Insurance Company is entitled to recover the awarded amount...
Post a Comment
Read more

Person Being Prosecuted To Be Provided With All Relevant Documents

The Delhi High Court, in the case of Poonam Jain vs Union of India & Ors, noted that a person being prosecuted against has a right to be provided with all the material relied upon by the prosecuting agency to prosecute her/ him. In the instant case, a search was conducted at the residences of the petitioners and their statements were recorded and several documents were seized. They were issued show cause notices under Section 276 C(1) and Section 277 of the Income Tax Act, Section 181 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 50 and 51 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act. They sought to be provided with a copy of their statements and the documents seised. However, the same was denied to them.
Post a Comment
Read more