India: Indian Courts And Anti-Arbitration Injunctions

Indian Courts are increasingly recognising and implementing the 'minimum interference' doctrine in context of international arbitrations. In the recent Judgment of McDonald's India Private Limited v Vikram Bakshi & Ors [FAO (OS) 9/2015, judgment dated 21 August 2016], the Delhi High Court (Delhi HC) has, inter alia, refused to grant an anti-arbitration injunction in the context of an international commercial arbitration.


Terms of the JVA

The case relates to a dispute between McDonald's India Private Limited (MIPL) and Mr Vikram Bakshi (VB) in connection with their joint venture. The parties had entered into a joint venture agreement (JVA) for the purposes of setting up and operating McDonald's restaurants in India. Pursuant to the JVA, the parties incorporated Connaught Plaza Restaurants Private Limited, which was the joint venture company (JVC). By way of a supplemental agreement to the JVA, Bakshi Holdings Private Limited (BHPL) also acceded to the JVA as an original party. The JVA was governed by Indian law and subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of New Delhi. It also contained an arbitration clause allowing for the settlement of disputes arising in connection with specific rights under the JVA by arbitration to be administered by the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA) with proceedings to be held in London.

Clause 32 of the JVA set out the grounds on which MIPL could exercise a call option to purchase all shares held by the other parties to the JVA (JV Counterparties) and Clause 35 of the JVA allowed for termination by a non-defaulting party on the occurrence of an event of default. One such event of default was failure by a party to vote for a managing director (MD) in the manner prescribed under the JVA. The JVA required that VB be appointed as the sole MD of the JVC.

In the year 2013, disputes arose between the parties to the JVA and after the initial term of appointment of VB as the MD expired, he was not re-appointed as the MD of the JVC. This resulted in a default under Clause 35 of the JVA entitling MIPL to exercise its right to terminate the JVA and to exercise its call option to purchase the shareholding of the JV Counterparties in the JVC.

Consequently, MIPL terminated the JVA and exercised the call option requiring the JV Counterparties to sell their shares in the JVC to MIPL.

Proceedings in India

VB challenged the termination of the JVA before the Company Law Board (CLB) alleging oppression and mismanagement by MIPL and sought his reinstatement as the MD of the JVC. The CLB, by way of an interim order, directed the parties to maintain status quo with respect to their shareholding in the JVC. Since the JVA contained an arbitration clause, MIPL filed an application under Section 45 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) before the CLB, seeking reference of the disputes between the parties to arbitration.

MIPL thereafter invoked arbitration before LCIA and both VB and BHPL participated in the arbitration proceedings without prejudice to their objection regarding the arbitrability of the disputes in question. MIPL also made an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration Act before the Delhi HC, seeking reliefs in aid of the arbitration proceedings. The said application was disposed of by the Delhi HC by a consent order dated 2 December 2013, wherein VB and BHPL agreed to maintain status quo with respect to their shareholding in JVC. However, even before the Delhi HC, VB and BHPL explicitly reserved their rights to raise objections regarding arbitrability of the disputes before the arbitral tribunal.

The application made under Section 45 of the Arbitration Act before the CLB by MIPL was subsequently withdrawn since the JVA was terminated and a separate arbitral reference had commenced. VB approached the CLB seeking stay of the arbitral proceedings, which was declined.

Suit before the Delhi HC

Four months after participating in the LCIA proceedings and nominating its arbitrator, VB filed a civil suit before the Delhi HC (Civil Suit), inter alia, seeking an injunction to stay the LCIA arbitration proceedings. The learned single Judge of the Delhi High Court granted the anti-arbitration injunction restraining MIPL from pursuing arbitration until the Civil Suit is disposed of or the status quo order of the CLB is vacated.

MIPL appealed against the said order of the learned single Judge before a Division Bench of the Delhi HC.


The Division Bench while deciding whether to grant such an anti-arbitration injunction held as follows:

  1. The doctrine of forum non-conveniens can only be invoked where the court deciding not to exercise jurisdiction had such jurisdiction in the first place. This is essentially a principle of common law which the Delhi HC found had no application in the instant case. The conflict herein was not between two courts but between a court and an arbitral tribunal. Secondly, the subject matter of the proceedings before the CLB wasin connection with oppression and mismanagement, whereas the proceedings before the arbitral tribunal related to the rights of the parties under the JVA. Further, the Delhi HC also held that an alternative forum chosen by the parties cannot be considered to be inconvenient.
  2. The underlying rationale and principles governing the grant of an injunction against arbitral proceedings set out under the erstwhile Arbitration Act, 1940 cannot be applied to cases under the present Arbitration Act. The Delhi HC noted that under the present Arbitration Act, there has been a shift towards directing the parties to arbitration rather than having the courts decide the same subject matter by way of a civil suit.
  3. Principles governing anti-suit injunctions cannot be applied while deciding whether to grant anti-arbitration injunctions due to the applicability of principles of party autonomy and kompetenz-kompetenz to arbitral proceedings. Therefore, the Delhi HC, in essence, held that a higher threshold would be applicable for the grant of anti-arbitration injunctions. The Delhi HC cited with approval the reasoning in Excalibur Venture LLC v Texas Keystone Inc. & Others [2011 EWHC 1624 (Comm)] holding that in the case of foreign-seated arbitrations, it is only in exceptional cases such as where the continuation of such proceedings may be oppressive or unconscionable that a court may grant an anti-arbitration injunction. Such a scenario would arise where the main issue is whether or not the parties consented to a foreign arbitration or where there is an allegation that the arbitration agreement is forged. The Delhi HC observed that none of these issues arose in the present case.
  4. The courts are duty bound to refer the disputes to arbitration in cases of international arbitration covered by the Convention on Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1958 (New York Convention) unless the parties can satisfy the court that the arbitration agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed. This rule will equally apply to requests for grant of anti-arbitration injunctions in respect of such arbitrations. In fact, the Delhi HC went so far as to agree with the English courts' approach in this respect and hold that despite the principle of kompetenz-kompetenz, courts in India would retain the jurisdiction to determine whether an arbitration agreement was null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed. 
  5. The expression 'null and void' would mean where the arbitration agreement is affected by some invalidity right from the beginning, such as lack of consent due to misrepresentation, duress, fraud or undue influence.
  6. The term 'inoperative' covers those cases where the arbitration agreement has ceased to have effect, such as a case of revocation by the parties. Another instance of the agreement having become inoperative is where it ceases to have effect because an arbitral award has already been made or there is a court decision which effectively operates as res judicata.
  7. In cases of international commercial arbitrations to which the New York Convention applies, the mere fact that allegations of fraud or misrepresentation need to be adjudicated by the arbitral tribunal will not make the arbitration agreement null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed. 
  8. The Delhi HC observed that the mere existence of the multiple proceedings, i.e. proceedings before the CLB and those before the arbitral tribunal, in the instant case, is not sufficient to render the arbitration agreement inoperative or incapable of being performed.
  9. The Delhi HC in the instant case did not rule on the applicability of Part I of the Arbitration Act to the instant arbitration agreement. However, it observed that even if Part I of the Arbitration Act were to apply, the court is bound to refer the parties, or anyone claiming through or under the party to arbitration unless it finds that prima facie, no valid arbitration agreement exists. 


Although the Delhi HC clarified that the approach of courts should be to minimise interference with arbitration since it is the forum of choice of parties, it did not enter into a detailed analysis of the degree of scrutiny which may be undertaken by courts in India to determine whether or not an arbitration agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed.

However, the Supreme Court of India in Chloro Controls India (P) Ltd. v Severn Trent Water Purification Inc., [(2013) 1 SCC 641] had clearly held that the court adjudicating an application under Section 45 of the Arbitration Act has to conclusively rule on the exceptions carved out under the said provision and that such a finding attains finality inter se parties and cannot be re-opened, even before the arbitral tribunal itself.

The Division Bench of the Delhi HC, in the instant case, has rightly tested the arbitration agreement against the three exceptions under Section 45 of the Arbitration Act viz. whether the agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed, and concluded that none of the aforementioned exceptions is met to merit granting an anti-arbitration injunction.

It is interesting to note that given the present proceedings were commenced under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC), the appellant could have argued that the Delhi HC ought to have decided the challenge to the impugned order of the learned single Judge on the tests prescribed under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of CPC itself and not as an application under Section 45 of the Arbitration Act. Therefore, the Delhi HC should have formed a view only on the prima facie study of facts and circumstances of the present case and should have left it to the arbitral tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction.

By way of this decision, the Delhi HC has clearly laid down the criteria to objectively determine if the challenge to an international arbitration proceeding to which the New York Convention applies, is covered by any of the three exceptions listed in Section 45 of the Arbitration Act.

The content of this document do not necessarily reflect the views/position of Khaitan & Co but remain solely those of the author(s). For any further queries or follow up please contact Khaitan & Co at

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.


Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.


Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.


A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.


This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.


If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.


This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.