Driven by excellence, focused on strategies for the longer term.

This is the crux of who we are. It is an articulation of precision in purpose, from the Firm’s beginnings to where we are today. Our collective eye is unerringly trained on tomorrow.

Deep sectoral expertise across services and industries.

Our insistence on strategic advisory exacts an in-depth understanding of and involvement with our clients’ businesses and industries. We engage not just individual businesses, but also contribute to the country’s legal and regulatory frameworks.

Personal commitment supported by experience and grit.

We commit early. We pull together internally for greater support. Every effort is sincere, every individual deeply dedicated to their task, their role, to the Firm.

Our undertakings for long-term impact are an organic extension of our purpose.

They are to employ our deep knowledge of the law beyond the business, the transaction, the deal. To use the opportunities and skills we possess, to reflect on the culture we’re creating. Individually and collectively, these are our efforts to help shape the thinking of our future generations, and arm them with strategies for true, sustainable growth.

Knowledge-sharing is intrinsic to equity and inclusivity.

This is a repository of thought leadership, deep insights and strong viewpoints, legal and other news and events and how they impact the industry and our clients.

Relevance is critical to growth. It necessitates a firm that is dynamic and responsive.

Amplifying intrinsic talent, sharpening skills, expanding knowledge, is vital to leading. It defines every aspect of how our firm functions and transacts. This is how we create new benchmarks and set industry standards.

  • Connect
Mar 30, 2020

SC Ruling on Challenge to Award due to Misconduct by Arbitrator

The SC, in Jagjeet Singh Lyallpuri v. Unitop Apartments and Builders Limited[1] has observed that once the parties have consented to the procedure of the arbitral proceedings, including not cross-examining the witnesses, the parties are thereafter estopped from challenging the arbitral award on the ground that the arbitrator misconducted himself by not permitting the parties to cross-examine the witnesses.

Since the arbitrator had, in the presence of the parties, recorded that the parties would rely upon the affidavits and documents that were filed and the procedure of cross-examination could be dispensed with, a party could not raise this issue as a ground to challenge the award at a later stage.

[1] Jagjeet Singh Lyallpuri v. Unitop Apartments and Builders Limited, (2020) 2 SCC 279.

TAGS

SHARE

Subscribe

DISCLAIMER

These are the views and opinions of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Firm. This article is intended for general information only and does not constitute legal or other advice and you acknowledge that there is no relationship (implied, legal or fiduciary) between you and the author/AZB. AZB does not claim that the article's content or information is accurate, correct or complete, and disclaims all liability for any loss or damage caused through error or omission.

RELATED READING

Inter Alia

MCA Updates Format of Corporate Filing in Form MGT-6 and BEN-2 for Disclosing Beneficial Interest

Oct 30, 2024 | Corporate / Mergers & Acquisitions
Inter Alia

SEBI Restricts Certain Intermediaries from Association with Unregulated Advisors

Oct 30, 2024 | Financial Services Regulatory & Securities
Inter Alia

Supreme Court Holds that Arbitral Awards with Inadequate Reasons Should be Explained Rather than Set Aside

Oct 30, 2024 | Dispute Resolution