India: Delhi High Court Upholds Foreign Award In Favour Of Daiichi (Except Qua Minor Respondents)

Last Updated: 6 February 2018
Article by Ajay Bhargava, Saman Ahsan and Sharngan Aravindakshan

Most Read Contributor in India, July 2019

By a judgment delivered on 31 January 2018, the Delhi High Court has held that the award passed in favour of Daiichi Sankyo Company Ltd. (the Petitioner) against the Singh Brothers and their associated companies (the Respondents) (erstwhile owners of Ranbaxy Laboratories Limited i.e. RLL) is enforceable (except against the minor Respondents). It may be noted that the arbitration proceedings were conducted under the aegis of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) whereas the Award was made in Singapore. The parties had chosen Singaporean law as procedural law of arbitration and Indian law as the governing law of the contract.


The facts in brief are: The Petitioner agreed to purchase from the Respondents their total stake in RLL for a value of over INR 1980 crores under a Share Purchase and Share Subscription Agreement dated 11 June 2008 (SPSSA) (aside from also purchasing shares from the public pursuant to SEBI Regulations), with payment being made in November 2008. Thereafter, in November 2009, the Petitioner claimed to have discovered the existence of an internal document known as a Self-Assessment Report (SAR), prepared sometime in 2004 by an RLL employee, which extensively dealt with widespread fraudulent practices at RLL including intentionally fabricating data for regulatory submissions to various regulators across the world, which had triggered a series of investigations by the US Food and Drugs Administration (FDA) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) from 2006 onwards. The Petitioner claimed that these investigations resulted in RLL having to eventually settle the matter with the said authorities at an estimated cost of USD 35 to 50 million per year (with the FDA) and USD 500 million (with DOJ) in 2011. It was alleged by the Petitioner that (i) SAR had been deliberately concealed by the Respondents in concert with some employees of RLL and (ii) the Respondents had deliberately misrepresented the genesis, nature and severity of the investigations against RLL, thereby fraudulently inducing the Petitioner to buy RLL to its peril. The Petitioner alleged that it had suffered direct and indirect losses as a result of entering into the SPSSA based on such fraudulent representations and claimed damages under Section 19 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (Contract Act). It is relevant to note that, during the pendency of the arbitration proceedings, on 23.05.2015, the Petitioner went on to sell its stake in RLL to Sun Pharma for a sum of INR 2267 crores.

The Award

The Arbitral Tribunal (AT) in Singapore rendered its award (2:1) in favour of the Petitioner and held that the Respondents had indeed misrepresented and actively concealed facts relating to the investigations against RLL in the United States and therefore fraudulently induced the Petitioner into buying their stake in RLL. The AT also held that merely because the Petitioner did not have /had forgone an indemnity claim in the agreement for losses suffered on account of such investigations, this would not preclude it from claiming damages since under Section 17 of the Contract Act an act of fraud could not be avoided by any express or implied agreement. The AT also held that on appreciation of facts, the Petitioner could not have reasonably discovered the fraud prior to 19 November 2009 and thus, given that the arbitration was invoked on 14 November 2012, the claim of the Petitioner was not time barred. In so far as the methodology of calculating damages is concerned, the Tribunal chose to resort to the "present value" of calculation and based on the return that the Petitioner expected to revive on its investment, as represented by the weighted cost of capital (WACC), and calculated the value that the Petitioner would have received from Sun Pharma had the sale taken place in November 2008.  The differential between the value that the Petitioner paid to the Respondents less the value that it would have received from Sun Pharma in November 2008 was calculated by the AT as damages payable to the Petitioner under Section 19 of the Contract Act.

Objections raised by the Respondents

The award rendered by the AT was objected to by the Respondents on various grounds. Primarily, it was argued by the Respondents that there had been no fraudulent representation on behalf of the Respondents and that the Petitioner was in no position to plead ignorance of the facts that it alleged were concealed from it. This was more so since significant information regarding the investigations was available in public domain. Thus, it was contended by the Respondents that Section 19 of the Contract Act has no application and that in any case there could be no grant of consequential damages under the Contract Act. The Respondents argued that in any case there was nothing to suggest that the disclosure of the investigations and consequent settlement with the authorities had any significant effect on the listed price of the shares meaning thereby that no loss was suffered by the Petitioner and the AT had, in fact, awarded restitution of loss of opportunities, which was a consequential damage which could not be granted either under the Contract Act or the agreement between the parties. It was contended that as there was no rescission of the contract by the Petitioner, the only damages that could be awarded to the Petitioner were compensating it for the impact of SAR and the penalty paid by Ranbaxy to the Authorities.

Judgement of the Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court observed on the limited scope of interference in so far as enforcement of a foreign award is concerned and noted that under Section 48(2)(b) of the Act, the enforcement could be refused only if the award was contrary to the (i) fundamental policy of India (ii) interest of India and (iii) justice or morality. Further, the Delhi High Court affirmed that an award could not be said to be against the fundamental policy of Indian law in case there was violation of provisions of a statute but only if there was a breach of a substantial principle on which Indian law is founded. It further noted that under Section 19 the Contract Act, reasonable compensation was to be awarded to ensure that the plaintiff is put in the same position he would have been, if the fraudulent representation had been true. The Delhi High Court noted the analysis of the AT in awarding damages under Section 19 of the Indian Contract Act and stated that the AT had awarded damages taking into account various other aspects such as reputational issue faced by the Petitioner, opportunity cost of six years by not entering into a transaction with a different generic company, diminution in its dividend and the cost of dealing with the investigations pursued by the authorities. The Delhi High Court held that the approach of the AT as regards the methodology for calculating damages could not be faulted with, particularly given the limited scope of Section 48 of the Act. It also stressed on the fact that the legal position regarding quantification of damages is well settled and that the methodology that may be adopted in different circumstances was clearly within the domain of AT. It was also observed that no case had been made out for breach of statutory provisions much less breach of fundamental policy of Indian law. The Delhi High Court also rejected the plea of the Respondents that the AT had awarded consequential damages. On the issue that the claim of the Petitioner was time barred, the Delhi High Court held that the finding that the Petitioner could not have discovered the fraud committed by the Respondents prior to 19 November 2009 was a finding of fact recorded by the AT and thus could not be interfered with by the Court in exercise of its powers under Section 48 of the Act, since the arbitral tribunal was the master of quantity and quality of evidence. However, in so far as the issue of the award being against the minor Respondents is concerned, the Delhi High Court held that the finding of the AT that a minor is capable of a fraud through its agent under Section 183 of the Contract Act and that the minor Respondents were guilty of fraud through their agent was a finding which was contrary to the statutory position in India as laid down in the Contract Act and the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956. Further, under Indian law, the fraud committed by the other major Respondents could not bind the minor Respondents. Thus, the Delhi High Court held that as regards the legal position on minors, it was the fundamental policy of Indian law to protect a minor and this was a substantial principle on which Indian law was founded. Thus, the award could not be held enforceable against the minor Respondents. Even otherwise, the Delhi High Court found the award to be 'shockingly disproportionate' to the minors in terms of the liability thrust upon them.


The present judgment of the Delhi High Court is yet another one in a series of recent judgments passed by the Indian Courts, prescribing minimal interference when it comes to enforcement of foreign awards. Taking a cue from judgments previously rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shri Lal Mahal Limited vs. Progetto Grano Spa 2014(2) SCC 433 and Associate Builders. vs. DDA., (2015) 3 SCC 49 as also the recent judgements of the Delhi High Court in Xstrata Coal Marketing AG vs. Dalmia Bharat (Cement) Ltd. (2016 SCC Online Del 5861) and Cruz City 1 Mauritius Holdings v. Unitech Limited 239 (2017) DLT 649), the Delhi High Court, in the present case also, has refused to set aside the award simply because it may be possible to have another view on the factual and legal issues involved in the dispute. Moreover, by reaffirming that mere contravention of an Indian statute would not result in breach of the fundamental policy of Indian law and holding that it would take only a breach of substantial principle on which Indian law is founded to have the award set aside, the bar for setting aside foreign awards has indeed been set very high by the Delhi High Court.

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.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

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 or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq 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 of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions