Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile
Articles by Aniketh Nair
A Second Chance Of Revival: A Legal Perspective On Section 33(1A) Of The IBC
Aniketh Nair’s articles from Dentons Link Legal are most popular: with Inhouse Counsel in India with readers working within the Law Firm and Construction & Engineering industries Introduction The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2026 has introduced a significant change to the liquidation framework under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”). Section 33(1A), creating an opportunity to restore the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (“CIRP”).
Freezing Risk During Litigation: Temporary Injunction As A Strategic Tool For Individuals And Businesses
Dentons Link Legal are most popular: within Criminal Law, Tax and Consumer Protection topic(s) with readers working within the Law Firm industries 1. INTRODUCTION At the inception of litigation or during its pendency, situations may arise where one party takes steps that threaten to alter the subject matter of the dispute or render the final relief ineffective.
Dentons Link Legal is delighted to announce the appointments of new partners in the Dispute Resolution team
Dentons Link Legal is delighted to announce the joining of Mustafa Motiwala, as Senior Partner in the Dispute Resolution team along with Associate Partners Aniketh Nair and Nihal Shaikh. Mustafa, with over three decades of experience, specializes in litigation, international and domestic arbitration, enforcement of foreign awards and judgements, real estate, intellectual property rights, media and entertainment and corporate work.
Does a Court have Jurisdiction to Assess Impartiality of Arbitrators in Institutional Arbitrations?
In this case, the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Bombay (“Court”) delved into whether a court has jurisdiction to entertain and decide on challenges to the independence and impartiality of an Arbitrator appointed by an Arbitral Institution, particularly after the Institution has made its decision on the subject.[1] Brief Facts: The Petitioner, Era International (“Era”), is engaged in the business of importing quality coal, while the Respondent no.1, Aditya Birla Global Trading Pvt Ltd.
Key developments in litigation in 2023
Insolvency and bankruptcy White-collar crimes Maritime law This article covers several progressive changes which have come up in the legal industry and have shaped the course of litigation in 2023. While last year saw many considerable changes in dispute resolution, this article also highlights the most relevant changes in the litigation of other sectors. Alternate dispute resolution Arbitration In the past year, the Indian Courts have passed various landmark judgments in relation to Arbitration.
Whether the Doctrine of Group of Companies is valid under the jurisprudence of India Arbitration Act?
Introduction While considering an application under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Act”), a three judge bench of Supreme Court doubted the correctness of the application of the doctrine of ‘Group of Companies’ by the Indian courts. Therefore, the Constitution Bench was called upon to determine the validity of the said doctrine in the jurisprudence of Indian Arbitration in the case between Cox and Kings Limited vs SAP India Private Limited & Anr.
The Clause Under The Purchase Order Shall Prevail On Conflicting Arbitration Clauses In Purchase Order And Invoices - Arbitration & Dispute Resolution - India
Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms.
Indian-Seated International Commercial Arbitration Not Bound By Statutory Time Limit
In view of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 20191, the Hon'ble Supreme Court ("Supreme Court") clarified that International Commercial Arbitrations ("ICA") shall not be governed by the time limit prescribed under Section 29-A2 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("the Act").3 Facts In the present case, the petitioner, i.e., Tata Sons Pvt. Ltd., the first respondent, i.e., Siva Industries & Holdings Ltd. and Tata Tele Services Ltd.
High Court determines jurisdiction of arbitrator to conduct consolidated arbitration
Facts Decision On 9 February 2023, the High Court of Bombay refused to interfere in a challenge to an arbitral award under section 34(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, wherein the arbitrator had consolidated nine separate disputes between the same parties.(2) Facts The petitioner, a textile company, entered into nine contracts with the respondent, a government undertaking, for the purchase of cotton bales.
An unsuccessful resolution applicant has no Locus to challenge The Resolution Plan or its implementation
Facts: Vasan Healthcare Pvt Ltd (Corporate Debtor) was admitted into Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). Thereafter, the resolution plan submitted by ASG Hospital Pvt Limited (Respondent No.2) was approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and subsequently by the National Company Law Tribunal (Adjudicating Authority) vide an order dated 3rd February, 2023 (Impugned Order).
Agreement to Explore Conciliation before Arbitration is not Mandatory
Facts: An Engineering, Procurement and Construction Contract was entered into between M/s. Oasis Project Ltd (Petitioner) and National Highway and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (Respondent). Thereafter, disputes arose between the parties pursuant to notice of termination of the contract dated 17th August, 2022 by the Petitioner and the notice for intention to terminate the contract dated 16th November, 2022 issued by the Respondent.
Moratorium under ibc will not prevent attachment of properties of corporate debtor under pmla: Delhi High Court
Recently, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi (“High Court”) caused yet another bend in the meandering interplay between the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“IBC”) and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“PMLA”). The High Court held that a moratorium imposed under Section 14 of the IBC (“Section 14”) will not preclude the Enforcement Directorate (“ED”) from attaching properties under Sections 5 and 8 of the PMLA.
Show More
loading
Actions
Is this you?
As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.Get in touch with Aniketh
Contact Aniketh, search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.
Learn more about Muck Rack