Litigation Law, Mediation Law and Arbitration Law

The CESTAT Mumbai has clarified the customs classification dispute surrounding glucometers, determining whether these portable blood glucose measurement devices belong under medical instruments or chemical analysis apparatus in the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The Tribunal's decision hinges on the fundamental operational principle of glucometers and establishes important precedent for classifying devices that serve both analytical and medical purposes.

Indian law lacks a direct mechanism for recognizing or enforcing interim measures issued by foreign-seated arbitral tribunals or emergency arbitrators, forcing parties to invoke Section 9 as an indirect route.

In a recent pronouncement, the Chennai Bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, comprising Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma (Judicial Member) and Mr. Jatindranath Swain (Technical Member), dismissed a company...

A Decree Holder seeks to execute an arbitral award of ₹385 crore through attachment and sale of properties, while Judgment Debtors argue they are undergoing Personal Insolvency Resolution Process under IBC, 2016. The central question is whether execution proceedings can continue when the statutory moratorium has expired but insolvency proceedings remain active, and whether this would grant preferential treatment disrupting the proposed repayment plan.

Our Partner, Sidharth Sethi, was invited as a speaker by the Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law & Justice (DLA MoL&J) and the India International Arbitration Centre...

The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in A2Z Infra Engineering Ltd. v. ITI Ltd.1 granted urgent interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("ACA") restraining ITI from termination an Annual Maintenance Contract ("AMC") linked to a BSNL telecom project. The Court

The Supreme Court’s judgment in Maniyar Iliyaz @ Shaik Riyaz & Anr. v. P. Ayyappan & Ors., marks an important development in Indian constitutional and urban governance jurisprudence.

In such a case, the affected party cannot always afford to wait until final adjudication. What is required is an immediate preventive remedy that preserves the subject matter of the dispute and protects the parties’ rights in the interim. This is where the remedy for a temporary injunction becomes significant.

In a significant judgment delivered on June 9, 2026, the Calcutta High Court, in the matter of Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd. versus Saanvi Samanta & Anr. and connected matters (2026:CHC-AS:841)...

The Supreme Court has delivered a landmark judgment reinforcing the binding nature of resolution plans approved by the Committee of Creditors under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. This decision addresses whether successful resolution applicants can use procedural technicalities to escape their obligations after securing CoC approval, building upon the precedent established in Ebix Singapore.

The Supreme Court’s decision in Kumud Lall v. Suresh Chandra Roy1 (2026) revisits a foundational yet unsettled question in Indian tort and consumer jurisprudence whether a claim...

Argus Partners presents its office locations and legal disclaimer, outlining the Bar Council of India's restrictions on advocate solicitation and advertising.