India: Court Procedure

Supreme Court through its judgement dated 08.05.2026 in the matter of Sheikh Abedin v Iqbal Ahmed & Another held that final decree under Order XII Rule 6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) can be passed, based on admission made in course of criminal proceedings.

Interim relief serves as a significant safeguard in the arbitration process, ensuring that assets are protected and the final award remains meaningful rather than a “useless victory”.

In arbitration, when two parties fall into a dispute, they go back to their agreement. That agreement usually names a place where the arbitration will happen. Sometimes it names two places, one where the proceedings...

Matrimonial litigation between highly qualified professional spouses throws up questions that courts are increasingly called upon to answer: when both parties hold advanced degrees...

The Bombay High Court ruled on a writ petition filed by Tata Sons Private Limited challenging aspects of arbitration proceedings involving NTT Docomo Inc.

The Supreme Court's decision in Home Care Retail Marts Pvt. Ltd. v. Haresh N. Sanghavi addresses a critical question in arbitration law: can a party that loses in arbitral proceedings still seek interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 after an award is rendered but before enforcement? This ruling resolves conflicting High Court interpretations and clarifies the scope of interim measures available to all parties, regardless of their success in arbitration.

The sanctity and enforceability of awards passed by Lok Adalats form a cornerstone of the alternative dispute resolution mechanism in India. In a significant judicial pronouncement...

The Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (“APTEL”), vide judgment dated 06.04.2026 in Review Petition No. 5 of 2025 in Appeal No. 126 of 2022 (“Review Petition”) partly allowed the Review Petition granting carrying cost on liquidated damages while reaffirming the limited scope of intervention in review proceedings.

The Supreme Court through its judgment dated 01.04.2026 in Rajiv Gaddh v. Subodh Parkash , held that a party abandoning earlier arbitral proceedings cannot subsequently file a fresh application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“A&C Act”) on the same cause of action.