Lawpedia

Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in  Nagreeeka Indcon Products Pvt. Ltd. v. Cargocare Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd.   (2026 INSC 384)  interpreted the term 'can' appearing in an Arbitration Clause of an agreement.  The issue that arose before the Court was to decide, when the arbitration clause in the contract uses the word ‘can’, does it necessitate the reference of all disputes to arbitration or is recourse to other dispute resolution mechanisms, including that of the Civil Court, open for the parties.  Facts: Appellant before the Supreme Court was manufacturer of  aluminium foil containers and  kitchen rolls. It had received  a contract for  purchase of corrugated boxes of aluminium foil from M/s.  American Alupack Industries, the delivery was to take place in USA. For the said purpose, the Appellant had entered into a contract with the Respondent. Disputes later arose between the parties with respect to the delivery of the said pro...

Pre-Existing Dispute under IBC: Supreme Court Reaffirms Limits of Section 9 GLS Films Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Chemical Suppliers India Pvt. Ltd.  (2026 INSC 344) 1.  Introduction The Supreme Court, in this significant decision, has once again clarified the scope and limitations of proceedings under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“ IBC ”). The ruling reiterates a crucial principle: the IBC is not a forum for adjudication of disputed claims or recovery of contested dues. The judgment reinforces that even the existence of a  plausible pre-existing dispute  is sufficient to reject an application filed by an operational creditor, thereby safeguarding corporate debtors from coercive insolvency proceedings. 2.   Factual Matrix In the case initiation of CIRP was denied by the adjudicating authority but the appellate authority reversed the decision. Aggrieved by the said decision, the Corporate Debtor filed an Appeal before the Hon'...