ARTICLE · 15 SEPTEMBER 2026

Newsletter August Disputes

Phoenix Legal

Contributor

Phoenix Legal

Phoenix Legal is a leading full-service Indian law firm, founded in 2008, providing comprehensive...

View firm profile

Explore more from Phoenix Legal

This newsletter examines recent Supreme Court judgments across arbitration, civil law, criminal law, insolvency, and white-collar crime. Key rulings address the binding of non-signatories to arbitration agreements, the scope of "industry" under the Industrial Disputes Act, limitations on FIR registration following Section 156(3) rejections, and the evidentiary requirements for proving bribery demands under the Prevention of Corruption Act.

IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

Phoenix Legal

Author LinkedIn connections

ARBITRATION

Date: 05 August 2026

Case Name:KKH Finvest Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. v. Ashiesh Shukla & Ors. Civil Appeal of 2026 (arising out of SLP (C) No. 4222 of 2025)

Forum: Supreme Court

The appellants i.e., KKH Finvest Pvt. Ltd. and Sensorise Digital Services Pvt. Ltd., entered into a Memorandum of Settlement dated 09 May 2022 (“MoS”) with the promoters and other stakeholders of the latter for its takeover and acquisition of the entire shareholding. The respondents i.e., Ashiesh Shukla, a consultant-shareholder holding 1,480 shares in the Appellant No. 2, who, although not a signatory to the MoS, executed a separate Share Purchase Agreement (“SPA”) on the same date for transfer of his shares pursuant to the transaction contemplated under the MoS.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Newsletter August Disputes

ARBITRATION

Related Articles

Bombay High Court Appoints Sole Arbitrator, Says Replacement Of Tender Arbitration Clause Not Shown Clearly At Section 11 Stage

Delhi High Court Refuses To Restrain Encashment Of Performance Bank Guarantee, Says Invocation Need Not Specify Amount Recoverable

Bombay High Court Upholds Arbitrator Appointed Under Section 84 Of The MSCS Act, Says Section 21 Notice Not Required

Arbitration Clause In Accepted Invoices Binds The Parties Despite The Absence Of A Separate Signature At The Section 11 Stage

Newsletter September Disputes

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

Litigation

Class Actions

International Arbitration

See more popular content from

Different Types Of Panchanama In Law

Cheque Bounce Cases: Presumptions And Procedure Under The NI Act

Section 354 In The Indian Penal Code: Outraging The Modesty Of A Woman – Complete Explanation IPC

Execution Of Court Order | Best Lawyer For Execution Petition

Article 21 Of The Indian Constitution: A Comprehensive Analysis Of The Right To Life And Personal Liberty

An Overview Of Lok Adalat Process In India

Section 138 Of The Negotiable Instruments Act: What The Supreme Court’s New Procedural Guidelines Mean For Cheque-Bounce Cases

Government Of NCT Delhi Notifies Court Fees (Delhi Amendment) Act 2026 To Amend The Court Fees Act, 1870 As Applicable In National Territory Of Delhi

Litigation Update I Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation Law For Possession Suits Based On Void Sale Deeds

What Is A "Charge Sheet" And Its Importance In The Entire Procedure Of Trial?

Moratorium Declared Under Section 14 Of The IBC Does Not Apply To Proceedings In Respect Of Directors Or Management Of Corporate Debtor: Supreme Court Of India

NCLAT Prohibits Substitution Of Resolution Applicant After CoC's Approval Of The Resolution Plan

NCLT Delhi Clarifies: Unpaid Dues Under A Settlement Agreement Is Not An ‘Operational Debt' Under IBC

Drawing The Line: Supreme Court Reaffirms The Administrative Role Of Sub-Registrars In K Gopi v. Sub-Registrar

Essar Steel Verdict: A Watershed Moment In India's Insolvency Regime

Insolvency And Bankruptcy Code 2016 Passed By Parliament

Right Of The High Court To Intervene When NCLT Passes An Order Pertaining To Public Law

Competition Monthly - September 2026 Edition

Draconian Penalty Under Indian Stamp Act, 1899 Not Automatic

Supreme Court Clarifies That It Is Not Necessary For The Resolution Plans To Match Up To Liquidation Value Of The Corporate Debtor