SANGHI INDUSTRIES LIMITEDversusRAVIN CABLES LTD., AND ANR
2022 INSC 105030 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed
Sanghi Industries Ltd invoked performance bank guarantees issued by Ravin Cables Ltd in respect of three purchase orders and subsequently commenced arbitration. Ravin Cables filed two applications under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 before Commercial Courts seeking to secure the disputed amoun…
NOY VALLESINA ENGINEERING SPA, (NOW KNOWN AS NOY AMBIENTE S.P.A.)versusJINDAL DRUGS LIMITED & ORS.
2020 INSC 65926 November 2020Appeal(s) allowed
NV Engineering (formerly Noy Vallesina) and Jindal Drugs entered into an engineering contract that provided for ICC arbitration with the seat in London. A partial award was made in 2000, which Jindal challenged before the Bombay High Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996; the court held t…
SEPCO ELECTRIC POWER CONSTRUCTION CORPORATIONversusPOWER MECH PROJECTS LTD.
2021 INSC 41724 August 2021
The appellant SEPCO, a Chinese corporation, was awarded a large arbitration award in favour of the Indian respondent Power Mech Projects. The High Court, under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act, directed SEPCO to furnish a Rs 30 crore bank guarantee from a "scheduled bank located in India". SEPCO complied by obtaining a…
OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL M.V. POLARIS GALAXYversusBANQUE CANTONALE DE GENEVE
2022 INSC 101523 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The case involved an Admiralty suit filed by Banque Cantonale de Geneve against the owners of the vessel M.V. Polaris Galaxy for alleged mis‑delivery of cargo. The Commercial Division of the Madras High Court, exercising its power under Order 1 Rule 10(2) of the CPC, added Gulf Petroleum FZC as a necessary party. The a…
IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATIONMISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 665 OF 2021 IN (SMW (C) NO. 3 OF 2020)versus.
2021 INSC 53623 September 2021Disposed off
The Supreme Court, acting suo motu, extended the limitation period for all judicial and quasi‑judicial proceedings due to the COVID‑19 pandemic, initially ordering an exclusion of the period from 15 March 2020 to 14 March 2021. After a decline in cases, the Court on 8 March 2021 limited the exclusion to that one‑year s…
OPG POWER GENERATION PRIVATE LIMITEDversusENEXIO POWER COOLING SOLUTIONS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR.
2024 INSC 71120 September 2024Dismissed
OPG Power Generation (the appellant) and its holding company Gita Power were sued by Enexio Power Cooling Solutions for unpaid amounts under supply and erection orders for an air‑cooled condenser unit. The arbitral tribunal held that Gita Power, as the holding company, was bound by the arbitration agreement and jointly…
PASL WIND SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusGE POWER CONVERSION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED
2021 INSC 26420 April 2021Disposed off
PASL Wind Solutions and GE Power Conversion India, both Indian companies, entered a settlement agreement that provided for arbitration under ICC rules with the seat in Zurich and the substantive law of India. A dispute over warranty claims was arbitrated, the arbitrator held the seat to be Zurich (with hearings in Mumb…
DESH RAJversusBALKISHAN (D) THROUGH PROPOSED LR MS. ROHINI
2020 INSC 5920 January 2020Disposed off
The appellant and respondent, brothers, entered into an agreement to sell one floor of their ancestral property, which the respondent later sought to enforce through a suit for specific performance. The appellant repeatedly failed to file a written statement within the timelines prescribed by Order VIII Rule 1 of the C…
JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. & ORS.versusREGISTRAR (GENERAL), ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK & ORS
2022 INSC 111919 October 2022Dismissed
Jaycee Housing Pvt. Ltd. and others appealed against a notification by the Odisha Government that designated the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) as a Commercial Court to hear arbitration applications under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The appellants argued that Section 2(1)(e) of the Arbitration A…
GOVERNMENT OF MAHARASHTRA (WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT) REPRESENTED BY EXECUTIVE ENGINEERversusM/S BORSE BROTHERS ENGINEERS & CONTRACTORS PVT. LTD.
2021 INSC 19419 March 2021Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to appeals filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, especially when those appeals are governed by Articles 116, 117 of the Limitation Act or by Section 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. It overruled th…
BRIJ RAJ OBEROIversusTHE SECRETARY, TOURISM AND CIVIL AVIATION DEPARTMENT & ANR.
2022 INSC 84518 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed
Brij Raj Oberoi leased the Norkhill Hotel from the State of Sikkim for 24 years under a deed that contained a renewal clause (clause 4(xiii)) requiring the lessee to give notice and, if the parties could not agree on the rent or period, to refer the dispute to arbitration. Oberoi offered renewal on 12 November 2020, bu…
M/S. PATIL AUTOMATION PRIVATE LIMITED AND ORS.versusRAKHEJA ENGINEERS PRIVATE LIMITED
2022 INSC 84117 August 2022Disposed off
The plaintiff, RAKHEJA ENGINEERS, filed a commercial suit for recovery of money without seeking urgent interim relief. The defendant, M/S. PATIL AUTOMATION, moved to reject the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC, arguing that the suit violated Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, which mandates pre‑in…
SUDHIR KUMAR @ S. BALIYANversusVINAY KUMAR G.B.
2021 INSC 48415 September 2021Case Partly allowed
The plaintiff filed a commercial suit in October 2018 seeking a permanent injunction against the defendant for alleged trademark infringement and obtained an ex‑parte interim injunction. Realising the suit was not compliant with the Commercial Courts Act, the plaintiff withdrew it on 27 July 2019 and filed a fresh suit…
JHARKHAND URJA UTPADAN NIGAM LTD. & ANR.versusM/S BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED
2025 INSC 53315 April 2025Dismissed
The respondent, M/s Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd., sued Jharkhand Urja Utpadan Nigam Ltd. and another party for recovery of a sum based on an award. The Commercial Court pronounced a judgment, but the petitioners filed their appeal under Section 13(1-A) of the Commercial Courts Act 2015 after a delay of 301 days and so…
ESSAR HOUSE PRIVATE LIMITEDversusARCELLOR MITTAL NIPPON STEEL INDIA LIMITED
2022 INSC 95714 September 2022Dismissed
Essar Steel deposited roughly Rs 35 crore and Rs 47 crore as refundable security deposits with Essar House Private and Essar Services respectively. After Essar Steel entered corporate insolvency resolution, the resolution applicant Arcelor Mittal Nippon Steel (Arcellor) sought repayment of those deposits and filed Sect…
M/S DHANBAD FUELS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR
2025 INSC 69614 May 2025Dismissed
The Union of India filed a money suit of over Rs 8.73 crore in a Commercial Court in August 2019 without first complying with the pre‑institution mediation requirement of Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The defendant, Dhanbad Fuels Pvt. Ltd., raised a preliminary objection and sought rejection of the pl…
PRAKASH CORPORATESversusDEE VEE PROJECTS LIMITED
2022 INSC 18014 February 2022Appeal(s) allowed
Prakash Corporates filed a money suit against Dee Vee Projects Limited on 21‑12‑2020. The defendant failed to file a written statement within the 30‑day period and sought extensions, which were granted up to 15‑04‑2021, but the 120‑day deadline fell on 06‑05‑2021. The trial court and the High Court refused further exte…
NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusHARSOLIA MOTORS AND OTHERS
2023 INSC 36713 April 2023Dismissed
The appellant National Insurance Co. Ltd. denied fire‑insurance claims of Harsolia Motors, a commercial enterprise, which led the respondents to file a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (CPA 1986). The Gujarat State Commission held the respondents were not "consumers" because the insurance was for a com…
CHINTELS INDIA LTD.versusBHAYANA BUILDERS PVT. LTD.
2021 INSC 7611 February 2021Appeal(s) allowed
Chintels India Ltd. filed an application under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to set aside an arbitral award, but the single judge of the Delhi High Court refused to condone the delay in filing the application and dismissed it. The appellant challenged that order by invoking section 37(1)(c) o…
M/S. N.N. GLOBAL MERCANTILE PVT. LTD.versusM/S. INDO UNIQUE FLAME LTD. & OTHERS
2021 INSC 1211 January 2021Matter referred to larger bench
The appellant, Global Mercantile, entered into a sub‑contract with Indo Unique containing an arbitration clause, but the work order was unstamped under the Maharashtra Stamp Act. A dispute arose when Indo Unique invoked a bank guarantee, which Global Mercantile alleged was fraudulent, leading to a civil suit and an app…
BGS SGS SOMA JVversusNHPC LTD.
2019 INSC 134910 December 2019Appeal(s) allowed
The petitioners BGS SGS SOMA JV sought to enforce an arbitral award concerning a hydro‑electric project, while the respondent NHPC Ltd filed a Section 34 petition in the Faridabad court to set aside the award. The petitioners applied under Section 151 CPC to have the petition returned to the appropriate court, and the …
MITC ROLLING MILLS PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANR.versusM/S RENUKA REALTORS AND ORS.
2025 INSC 130010 November 2025Appeal(s) allowed
MITC Rolling Mills Pvt. Ltd. filed a commercial suit for recovery of Rs.2.5 crore. The trial court rejected the plaint under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC on the ground that the plaintiff had not complied with the mandatory pre‑institution mediation under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The appellant cha…
BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. & ANR.versusM/S NORTEL NETWORKS INDIA PVT. LTD.
2021 INSC 17510 March 2021Appeal(s) allowed
The dispute arose when BSNL (appellant) withheld Rs.99.70 crore from Nortel (respondent) after completing a telecom tender. Nortel claimed the amount in May 2014, which BSNL rejected on 4 August 2014. After more than five years, Nortel invoked the arbitration clause on 29 April 2020 and sought appointment of an arbitra…
M/S ANVITA AUTO TECH WORKS PVT. LTD.versusM/S AROUSH MOTORS & ANR.
2025 INSC 12028 October 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The case arose from a commercial dispute where the plaintiff, Aroush Motors, sued Anvita Auto Tech Works for recovery of monies after terminating a dealership agreement. The defendant failed to file its written statement within the statutory 120‑day period and sought multiple extensions, eventually filing the statement…
IN RE: COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATIONversus.
2021 INSC 1688 March 2021Disposed off
In a suo motu writ petition, the Supreme Court examined the extension of limitation periods granted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Earlier orders had excluded the period from 15 March 2020 to a date to be fixed, allowing litigants extra time to file suits, appeals and other proceedings. Observing that the pandemic situa…
M/S JINDAL STEEL AND POWER LTD. & ANR.versusM/S BANSAL INFRA PROJECTS PVT. LTD. & ORS.
2025 INSC 6407 May 2025Disposed off
The appellants Jindal Steel issued a work order to Bansal Infra and obtained an unconditional bank guarantee to secure an advance payment. After alleged delays, quality deficiencies and termination of the contract, the appellants threatened to encash the guarantee unless a debit balance was paid. Bansal filed a Section…
ODISHA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATIONversusVIGYAN CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES AND OTHERS
2025 INSC 9285 August 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The Odisha State Financial Corporation (OSFC) financed a bleaching powder unit that defaulted, leading to its possession of the unit and subsequent litigation. Respondent Vigyan Chemical Industries sued the defaulting borrower and later impleaded OSFC, claiming repayment with interest calculated under the repealed Inte…
AMBALAL SARABHAI ENTERPRISES LTD.versusK. S. INFRASPACE LLP & ANR.
2019 INSC 11354 October 2019Dismissed
Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. filed a suit in the Vadodara Commercial Court seeking specific performance of a mortgage deed concerning a parcel of land. The respondents contended that the dispute did not fall within the definition of a "commercial dispute" under Section 2(1)(c)(vii) of the Commercial Courts Act, 20…
ADITYA KHAITAN & ORS.versusIL AND FS FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED
2023 INSC 8673 October 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants, nine defendants in a commercial suit filed by IL and FS Financial Services Ltd, failed to file written statements within the 30‑day period (ending 8 March 2020) and the 120‑day outer limit (ending 6 June 2020). They sought an extension on 20 January 2021, invoking the Supreme Court's suo motu orders tha…
S. D. CONTAINERS INDOREversusM/S. MOLD TEK PACKAGING LTD.
2020 INSC 6681 December 2020
S.D. Containers (Indore) sued M/s Mold Tek Packaging Ltd for infringement of its registered container and lid designs, seeking a declaration and permanent injunction. The defendant counter‑claimed, seeking cancellation of the designs under Section 4(a) of the Design Act, 2000, and filed an application under Section 22(…
M/S ARIF AZIM CO. LTD.versusM/S APTECH LTD.
2024 INSC 1551 March 2024Case Allowed
The petitioners, an Afghan franchisee, sought appointment of a sole arbitrator under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to resolve disputes over royalty payments and renewal of franchise agreements with the respondent. The key issues were whether the Limitation Act, 1963 applied to a Section 11…