Alerts & Updates 29th Aug 2018

ELP Arbitration Weekly Update

Latest Thought Leadership

Alerts & Updates 11th Mar 2026

India’s new DPDP regime – What GDPR-compliant businesses should know

Read More
Alerts & Updates 10th Mar 2026

SEBI operationalizes the SWAGAT-FI framework for FPIs and FVCIs

Read More
Alerts & Updates 10th Mar 2026

SEBI Revamps and Replaces Its 30-Year-Old Regulations for Mutual Funds

Read More
Newsletter/Booklets 10th Mar 2026

Capital Markets Newsletter: February 2026

Read More

This week we have analyzed the decision of the Delhi High Court in Ok Play Auto Pvt. Ltd. v. Indian Commerce & Industries Co. Pvt. Ltd., wherein the Court was called upon to decide the following issues:

a. which arbitration clause constituted a binding arbitration agreement between the parties and
b. whether the Delhi HC had territorial jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator.

The court found that while parties had agreed to resolve their disputes through arbitration, they had failed to agree upon the mechanism for appointment of arbitrator and the seat of arbitration. Having found that the parties had failed to agree upon a seat, in order to determine which court had jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator, the Delhi High Court placed reliance on the definition of ‘Court’ under section 2(e) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and upheld its jurisdiction to appoint an arbitrator.

Read More

Privacy Policy

As per the rules of the Bar Council of India, lawyers and law firms are not permitted to solicit work or advertise. By clicking on the "I Agree" button, you acknowledge and confirm that you are seeking information relating to Economic Laws Practice (ELP) of your own accord and there has been no advertisement, personal communication, solicitation, invitation or any other inducement of any sort whatsoever by or on behalf of ELP or any of its members to solicit any work through this website.