Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 02 FEBRUARY 2021

Stamp Duty On An Arbitral Award: Mohini Electricals Limited v Delhi Jal Board

Tuli & Co
Tuli & Co
Contributor
Tuli & Co

Tuli & Co

About us: Tuli & Co was established in 2000 to service the Indian and international insurance and...

View firm profile
Explore more from Tuli & Co

The Delhi High Court has clarified that: (i) stamp duty is only to be paid on an arbitral award at the time of enforcement, and (ii) a photocopy of an award is not an "instrument" under the...

IndiaLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration
Madhav Misra
Madhav Misra
Ribhu Garg
Ribhu Garg
Author LinkedIn connections

Stamp Duty On An Arbitral Award: Mohini Electricals Limited V Delhi Jal Board1

30 January 2021

The Delhi High Court has clarified that: (i) stamp duty is only to be paid on an arbitral award at the time of enforcement, and (ii) a photocopy of an award is not an “instrument” under the Indian Stamp Act 1899, and therefore cannot be impounded.

Facts

The decree holder filed a petition to enforce an arbitral award. In support, a photocopy of the award was filed which showed that the award was insufficiently stamped. The decree holder filed an application seeking exemption from filing the original award, which was allowed as there was no objection from the judgment debtor. The decree holder subsequently filed the original award having paid the correct amount of stamp duty.

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

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

CCPA’s Guidelines On Dark Patterns: An Overview

The visual interface of ecommerce platforms increasingly influences how consumers select, purchase, subscribe to and cancel goods and services. Before the issuance of a framework specifically addressing dark patterns, the Consumer Protection Act 2019 (“Consumer Protection Act”) and the Consumer Protection (E-Commerce) Rules 2020 (“E-Commerce Rules”) already prohibited unfair trade practices in e-commerce.
IndiaConsumer Protection
Tuli & Co
Tuli & Co
Article

Termination, Recovery & Damages – Lessons From FW Aviation v Vietjet

The dispute in FW Aviation (Holdings) 1 Limited v VietJet Aviation Joint Stock Company1 has been decided through three substantial judgments of the English Commercial Court (“English Court”). Together, they address whether the aircraft leases were validly terminated, sums payable as a result of termination, and the extent to which damages could be claimed for losses arising from the condition, detention and delay in eventual export of the aircraft.
IndiaTransport
Tuli & Co
Tuli & Co
Article

No Name? No Escape From Criminal Prosecution: Supreme Court Answers In Sanofi v CBI

The Supreme Court has held that criminal proceedings against a company cannot be quashed merely because no natural person acting for it has been identified or arraigned. Allegations must prima facie reveal that a natural person acted on behalf of the company and that the surrounding circumstances do not render the existence of the requisite mens rea patently absurd or inherently improbable.
IndiaCriminal Law
Tuli & Co
Tuli & Co