India: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

In-house counsel employed by corporations are not entitled to attorney-client privilege due to their employment status and lack of professional independence, says the Supreme Court

The recent judgement of the Supreme Court of India in Re: Summoning Advocates who give legal opinion is not merely a legal ruling; it is a profound jurisprudential restatement of the very foundations of a robust justice delivery system.

The Supreme Court of India, in a significant and far-reaching judgment, has reaffirmed the sanctity of the advocate-client relationship and curtailed investigative agencies' powers...

The appeal arose from an arbitral dispute in which the appellant challenged an order of the Arbitral Tribunal rejecting an objection under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The appellant contended that various agreements executed between the parties were insufficiently stamped and, being in the nature of “conveyance”, ought to have been impounded before arbitration could proceed.

The validity of an arbitration agreement under Section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Act) ultimately boils down to consent. At its core, an arbitration clause is nothing more than a contractual promise by the parties to resolve their disputes outside the regular court system. But consent isn’t always straightforward.

On 22 May 2026, the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports, Department of Sports (MoYAS), notified two sets of rules under the National Sports Governance Act, 2025 (NSG Act): (i) the National Sports Governance (National Sports Board) Rules, 2026 (NSB Rules) vide G.S.R. 404(E); and (ii) the National Sports Governance (National Sports Tribunal) Rules, 2026 (NST Rules) vide G.S.R. 405(E) (collectively, “Rules”). Both were published in the Official Gazette on 25 May 2026 and came into force on the date of publication.

The relation between strict procedural compliance and substantive justice under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act)...

The Supreme Court of India has once again reaffirmed the settlement-oriented philosophy underlying cheque dishonour litigation by holding that an offence under Section 138...

The Supreme Court of India delivered a scathing critique of judicial conduct in arbitration matters, examining a case where an arbitral award from 2014 remained unenforced for over a decade due to repeated court challenges.

A Decree Holder seeks to execute an arbitral award of ₹385 crore through attachment and sale of properties, while Judgment Debtors argue they are undergoing Personal Insolvency Resolution Process under IBC, 2016. The central question is whether execution proceedings can continue when the statutory moratorium has expired but insolvency proceedings remain active, and whether this would grant preferential treatment disrupting the proposed repayment plan.

Our Partner, Sidharth Sethi, was invited as a speaker by the Department of Legal Affairs, Ministry of Law & Justice (DLA MoL&J) and the India International Arbitration Centre...

The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in A2Z Infra Engineering Ltd. v. ITI Ltd.1 granted urgent interim measures under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("ACA") restraining ITI from termination an Annual Maintenance Contract ("AMC") linked to a BSNL telecom project. The Court