In March 2020, the Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of the impact of the Covid-19 restrictions on compliance with limitation periods, and this led to Suo Motu Writ Petition (Civil) No 3 of 2020. The Supreme Court's order of 23 March 2020 "extended" limitation periods from 15 March 2020 until further orders. The Supreme Court periodically revisited its order and largely kept the extension in place, until now…

§34 of the Act permits a challenge to an arbitral award on limited grounds within 3 months from the date on which the award is received. A 30 day extension can be sought on showing "sufficient cause". §37(1)(c) permits an appeal from orders "setting aside or refusing to set aside" an award under §34. In BGS SGS Soma2, the Supreme Court had held that an order condoning delay in filing a §34 challenge is a preliminary order and so not appealable…

In 2019 several pharmaceutical companies proceeded against General Insurance Corporation of India (GIC) Re before the Delhi High Court to challenge the revision of reinsurance premium rates. They claimed that the revisions were arbitrary and unreasonable. The court held that GIC Re's rate revisions were within its commercial wisdom and accordingly dismissed the writ petitions…

The Supreme Court of India has confirmed that the consumer fora has the power under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 to set aside one-sided terms in contracts if this amounts to an unfair trade practice. Facts: The plaintiff was developing a residential project called The Corridors in Gurgaon. Several purchasers filed complaints before the National Commission seeking a refund of the instalments they had paid, plus interest, because the plaintiff had failed to give possession within…

The recent trend of simple, standardised products being introduced for various forms of life and health insurance business has continued with the introduction of a standard immediate annuity product. On 25 January 2021, the IRDAI issued the “Guidelines on Standard Individual Immediate Annuity Product, “Saral Pension”” (Guidelines)…

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…

The control and acquisition of entities in India by foreign investors and private equity (PE) funds is regulated by: the foreign investment norms specified by the Reserve Bank of India; the norms specified by the Securities Exchange Board of India (where the entity is a listed entity); and any other laws or regulations governing the business of the target entity. Entities engaged in insurance business must follow additional norms regarding foreign investment as specified by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI)…

-

-

-

-

-

-

With the widespread impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and several regulatory changes having been introduced (as well as proposed) by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority of India (IRDAI), 2020 was a busy year for the Indian insurance sector. This article provides an overview of some of the key developments of 2020…

Because of deficiency in service and misleading ads, the Kerala District Commission has fined the manufacturer of a hair growth cream and the cream's brand ambassador. The store owner that sold the cream has been directed to pay the costs of the proceedings to the Complainant…

The Supreme Court has recently clarified that a "notional" income should be considered for deceased, non-earning victims (including homemakers) of motor vehicle accidents, and that future prospects should be assessed based on such notional income in order to arrive at fair, just, and reasonable compensation…

The Supreme Court has held that the non-payment or underpayment of stamp duty does not invalidate an arbitration agreement contained in a contract, but because of a conflict with an earlier Supreme Court judgment, the question has been referred to a larger bench…

In Noy Vallesina, the Supreme Court has ruled that even under the pre-BALCO regime, if parties have agreed that the seat of arbitration will be outside India, then Part – I of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act 1996 will not be applicable…

The Delhi High Court has held that two Indian parties may normally choose foreign law to govern the substantive dispute between them in arbitration proceedings, and the Court's right to set aside the choice of foreign law should be used sparingly and only when the choice amounts to a “flagrant and gross breach” of principles of morality and justice…