Alerts & Updates 19th Aug 2019

ELP – Arbitration weekly update – Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. v. Canara Bank & Ors

Latest Thought Leadership

Labour and Employment
News & Media 4th May 2026

This is how new labour codes help HR to address the concern of gig workers

Read More
international trades
Alerts & Updates 30th Apr 2026

India – New Zealand Free Trade Agreement

Read More
Podcasts 30th Apr 2026

ELP Podcast Series: Directors and the Law — An Insider’s View

Read More
Alerts & Updates 29th Apr 2026

Verifiable consent for processing personal data of children under the DPDP Act

Read More

This week, we analyze a recent judgment of the Supreme Court in Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. v. Canara Bank & Ors. Disputes arose between Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. (MTNL) and Canara Bank (Canara), and Canara filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court (Court) in relation to bonds placed by MTNL with Can Bank Financial Services Ltd. i.e. the wholly owned subsidiary of Canara Bank (CANFINA). CANFINA was made a proforma party to the writ petition. In the proceedings before the Court, the parties consented to refer their disputes to arbitration before a sole arbitrator. Accordingly, by way of an order (Order), the Court recorded the reference of disputes to arbitration and appointed the sole arbitrator.

  • The issues which arose for consideration before the Supreme Court were (a) whether a valid arbitration agreement existed between the three parties; and (b) whether CANFINA was a party to the arbitration agreement and ought to be impleaded in the arbitration proceedings.

    Upon examining section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the Act” and the facts of the case, the Supreme Court held that a valid arbitration agreement existed between the parties.

    Reflecting upon the jurisprudence on the ‘Group of Companies’ doctrine and the factual matrix, the Supreme Court invoked the ‘Group of Companies’ doctrine and joined CANFINA in the arbitration proceedings pending before the tribunal. The Supreme Court remitted the matter to the tribunal and clarified that it has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the dispute.

    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.