India: Contracts and Commercial Law

In a recent ruling , the Supreme Court examined whether a Letter of Intent (LOI), read together with tender documents containing an arbitration clause, was sufficient to constitute a concluded contract and a valid arbitration agreement under Section 7 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The appeal arose from an order of the Bombay High Court appointing a sole arbitrator under Section 11 of the Act.

Every M&A lawyer has, at some point, sat across the table from opposing counsel arguing over a single clause for far longer than its word count would suggest is reasonable. More often than not, that clause is indemnity. It rarely makes headlines the way valuation or deal structure does, but ask any dealmaker what actually gets fought over in the last mile of negotiations, and the answer is almost always the same - who bears the loss when things go wrong and how much of it.

The Supreme Court’s decision in M/s Bhagheeratha Engineering Ltd. v. State of Kerala (2026 INSC 4, decided on 5 January 2026) represents a decisive reaffirmation of pro-arbitration principles under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

The July 2026 edition of Fox & Mandal's Dispute Resolution & ADR Newsletter analyses the validity of granting compensation in lieu of injunction; Housing societies having a commercial stake are ‘promoters’ under RERA; Perversity is a facet of patent illegality, and cannot be repackaged as public policy violation to broaden judicial review of an international commercial arbitral award; and other recent judgments of the Supreme Court of India and various High Courts.

India had a prime role in laying the foundation of modern-day arbitration. It was amongst the six Asian nations to have signed the Geneva Convention on the Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1927. As noted jurist, Mr. F.S. Nariman points out – none from the Americas subscribed to it. Later, in July 1960, India was amongst the 10 original signatories to the New York Convention and the fourth country to ratify the same. The USA ratified the New York Convention a full 10 years later in 1970 and the UK in 1975. China and Singapore ratified the Convention fairly recently, in the mid-1990s

This newsletter highlights significant developments in Indian competition law, featuring key enforcement actions and merger approvals by the Competition Commission of India. From investigations into restrictive practices to major corporate acquisitions across industries, these cases demonstrate the regulator's active role in maintaining market competition and scrutinizing business combinations.

The State of Haryana introduced the Haryana Global Capability Centre Policy 2026, vide Gazette Notification dated 27th May 2026, signalling its intent to position itself as a preferred destination for multinational corporations seeking to establish or expand GCC operations in India.

Section 31(7) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“the Act”) governs arbitrator's power to award interest. Section 31(7)(a) covers pre-award/pendente lite interest (subject to party agreement), while section 31(7)(b) covers post-award interest. Courts have consistently held that these provisions operate separately, with arbitrator having absolute discretion while awarding future interest however, bound by parties’ agreement (if any) with respect to pre- award period.

This website disclaimer outlines the terms under which users may access information about AZB & Partners law firm. The notice addresses Bar Council of India regulations prohibiting solicitation and advertising, while establishing that user access is voluntary and does not create an attorney-client relationship.