<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Arbitral award on contract validity and suppression of insolvency set aside for procedural failures; fresh arbitration permitted.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96194</link>
    <description>Arbitral proceedings were invalidated due to procedural irregularities: the tribunal denied a timely application to amend defence and counterclaim despite the petitioners contention that knowledge of suppression of an ongoing insolvency process against a lead consortium member arose after the pleadings deadline, and thus failed to decide a crucial challenge to contract validity rendering the arbitration agreement and award tainted by alleged fraud; the tribunal further awarded substantial claims without any oral evidence, framed issues after directing earlier evidence filings, and recorded findings without referring to supporting documents. Consequence: the award was set aside and fresh arbitration was permitted with full opportunity to lead evidence and raise the validity defence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2026 08:41:28 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2026 08:41:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=880145" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Arbitral award on contract validity and suppression of insolvency set aside for procedural failures; fresh arbitration permitted.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96194</link>
      <description>Arbitral proceedings were invalidated due to procedural irregularities: the tribunal denied a timely application to amend defence and counterclaim despite the petitioners contention that knowledge of suppression of an ongoing insolvency process against a lead consortium member arose after the pleadings deadline, and thus failed to decide a crucial challenge to contract validity rendering the arbitration agreement and award tainted by alleged fraud; the tribunal further awarded substantial claims without any oral evidence, framed issues after directing earlier evidence filings, and recorded findings without referring to supporting documents. Consequence: the award was set aside and fresh arbitration was permitted with full opportunity to lead evidence and raise the validity defence.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2026 08:41:28 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=96194</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>