https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770295 The SC held that arbitral tribunals have the power to implead non-signatories to arbitration agreements, being better positioned than referral courts to make such determinations through comprehensive fact-intensive inquiries. The court distinguished between determining "existence" of arbitration agreements versus "existence qua non-signatories," ruling the latter falls outside Section 11(6A) jurisdiction. Referral courts should exercise restraint in making such determinations to avoid frustrating dispute resolution. The tribunal must follow natural justice principles and decide impleadment issues early to prevent prejudice. The court applied the "group of companies" doctrine, finding the appellant companies operated under same management with intertwined operations, upholding the HC's decision allowing joinder. en-us Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 May 2025 09:12:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770295 The SC held that arbitral tribunals have the power to implead non-signatories to arbitration agreements, being better positioned than referral courts to make such determinations through comprehensive fact-intensive inquiries. The court distinguished between determining "existence" of arbitration agreements versus "existence qua non-signatories," ruling the latter falls outside Section 11(6A) jurisdiction. Referral courts should exercise restraint in making such determinations to avoid frustrating dispute resolution. The tribunal must follow natural justice principles and decide impleadment issues early to prevent prejudice. The court applied the "group of companies" doctrine, finding the appellant companies operated under same management with intertwined operations, upholding the HC's decision allowing joinder. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=770295