Peshwan Jehangir is a Partner with the Litigation and Dispute Resolution practice team. He has vast experience in the field of dispute resolution and has handled various international and domestic arbitration matters and a large variety litigation matters before various courts in India, as well as the securities appellate tribunal, and National Company Law Tribunal / company law board and National Green Tribunal.
Vivek Jhunjhunwala is a Partner in the Dispute Resolution practice group.
Vanita Bhargava is a Senior Member of the Dispute Resolution Team in the New Delhi office. She is also an advocate on record in Supreme Court. She has almost 20 years of experience in a variety of matters including matters relating to constitutional laws, taxation laws, environment laws, civil laws, corporate laws, mining laws, forest laws, shareholding disputes and arbitration (domestic and international), banking laws and insolvency matters.
Ajay Bhargava is a Senior Partner in the Dispute Resolution practice group in the New Delhi and National Capital Region office.
Jeevan Ballav Panda is a Partner at Khaitan & Co, with over 18 years of experience spanning dispute resolution and employment and labour law. Based in the firm’s Delhi NCR office, he advises and represents leading domestic and multinational clients in complex commercial disputes, arbitrations and contentious and advisory employment matters.
The Bombay High Court (Court), in its recent decision in Dinesh Jaya Poojary vs Malvika Chits India Pvt Ltd (Arbitration Petition No 549 of 2016), had the occasion to deal with the above question in a petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 (Arbitration Act), which inter alia, challenging the award of an arbitral tribunal (Impugned Award) on the ground that the Arbitrator acted without jurisdiction.
A single judge of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court (S.J. Kathawalla, J.) (Court) in Reliance General Insurance Co v Colonial Life Insurance Co (Comm Suit No. 29 of 2013) hasheld that the mandatory timeline of 120 days for filing a written statement in a commercial suit, would not apply to suits filed prior to the enactment of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (the Act).
The division bench of the Supreme Court of India (Supreme Court) comprising of Hon’ble Mr Justice R F Nariman and Hon’ble Mr Justice Surya Kant, in its judgment dated 10 July 2019 in Gammon Engineers and Contractors Pvt Ltd v National Highways Authority of India, has inter alia held that if the parties to an arbitration have agreed to a fee schedule of arbitrators, then the arbitrators will be entitled to charge their fees in accordance with this agreed schedule and not in accordance with the Fourth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015.
Chakrapani Misra is a Senior Partner in the Disputes Resolution Practice Group of the Firm based in Mumbai. With over three decades of experience in the field, he specialises in commercial disputes resolution.
Chakrapani also regularly acts for and advises clients in domestic and international arbitrations including maritime arbitration. He also acts as arbitrator in complex disputes.
