Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 30 APRIL 2026

Newsletter For April 2026

Phoenix Legal
Phoenix Legal
Contributor
Phoenix Legal

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 comprehensive legal newsletter examines landmark Supreme Court and High Court judgments from April 2026 across arbitration, civil law, criminal law, insolvency...

IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Phoenix Legal
Phoenix Legal
Author LinkedIn connections

ARBITRATION

Case Name: Rajiv Gaddh v. Subodh Parkash Civil Appeal No. of 2026 (@ SLP (C) No. 4430 of 2025)

Forum: Supreme Court

The present appeal arose from an order dated 08.11.2024 passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, whereby an application filed by the respondent under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) was allowed and a sole arbitrator was appointed. The parties had jointly participated in an auction conducted by Jammu & Kashmir Bank for the purchase of 550 marlas of land situated in Hoshiarpur, Punjab (“the Hoshiarpur Land”). Three inter-related agreements were executed between the parties on 02.04.2013 to resolve disputes arising out of their joint venture and the Hoshiarpur Land, each containing an arbitration clause.

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.

Register for freeORLog in

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.

View source

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

Related Comparative Guides

See more popular content from

Article

Decree Execution Under Order XXI CPC – An In-depth Insight

Order XXI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides the comprehensive framework for executing decrees in Indian civil litigation. This article examines the procedural mechanisms for decree execution, including filing execution petitions, methods of property attachment, and the legal processes for recovering money decrees through sale of attached assets.
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Maheshwari & Co. Advocates & Legal Consultants
Maheshwari & Co. Advocates & Legal Consultants
Article

Section 35(3) BNSS Notice Is The Rule, Arrest An Exception For Offences Up To 7 Years: Supreme Court

In Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2026 INSC 115, the Supreme Court of India has reiterated and strengthened the safeguards governing arrest under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), holding that issuance of notice under Section 35(3) of the BNSS is the rule in cases involving offences punishable with imprisonment of up to seven years.
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Vaish Associates Advocates
Vaish Associates Advocates
Article

The Limitation Clock On Money Recovery: Understanding Article 113, Acknowledgment And Extension Under Indian Law

Understanding the critical timelines and legal frameworks governing money recovery suits in India requires navigating the complex interplay between the Limitation Act of 1963 and the Indian Contract Act of 1872. When does the clock actually start ticking on your right to sue, and how can acknowledgments or digital evidence extend or restart that crucial three-year window?
IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Maheshwari & Co. Advocates & Legal Consultants
Maheshwari & Co. Advocates & Legal Consultants
Article

Newsletter August Disputes

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
Phoenix Legal
Article

Competition Monthly - September 2026 Edition

The Competition Commission of India has issued significant rulings on anti-competitive practices in agricultural input distribution and tire procurement, while also approving major acquisitions in sports franchising and education technology. These decisions demonstrate the CCI's active enforcement against bid-rigging and boycott campaigns, alongside its assessment of market consolidation in emerging sectors.
IndiaAntitrust/Competition Law
Phoenix Legal
Phoenix Legal
Article

From Fan Edits To AI Clones: Who Owns A Celebrity’s Face, Voice And ‘Vibe’? Personality Rights, Copyright, And Freedom Of Expression In India’s Creator Economy

A celebrity’s face appears in a meme. Their voice is recreated to say something they never said. An influencer becomes the unwilling face of a product they have never endorsed. Meanwhile, millions of users continue to make fan edits, reaction videos, parody accounts and humorous reels using the same celebrities’ images and voices.
IndiaIntellectual Property
Phoenix Legal
Phoenix Legal