Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court Daily-Wage Employees Treated As Permanent Under 1988 Government Resolution Entitled To Annual Increment Benefits: Supreme Court

For Claims of Damages, Proof of Actual Loss is Sine Qua Non” – Bombay High Court Stays Arbitral Award

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Bombay High Court has granted an unconditional stay on an arbitral award in a dispute concerning breach of contract and damages, emphasizing the necessity of proving actual loss in claims for damages.

Facts & Issues: The case involves Alkem Laboratories Limited and Issar Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Limited, centered on a dispute over a Marketing and Distribution Agreement (MDA) for a product named MELGAIN. The key issue was the arbitrator’s award of damages to Issar Pharmaceuticals for Alkem’s alleged breach of contract regarding minimum purchase volumes, despite no proof of actual loss being provided.

Court’s Assessment:

Contradiction in Arbitral Award: The court observed that while the arbitrator acknowledged the need for proving actual loss in damages, the award was paradoxically based on the product price, not the actual loss, failing to consider necessary deductions like manufacturing costs.

Burden of Proof Not Met: Alkem’s counsel argued that the claimant failed to show any proof of loss, a crucial element in damage claims. The court noted this was in direct contradiction to settled legal principles.

Unique Nature of Contract Overlooked: The court criticized the arbitrator’s approach, noting a flawed application of legal principles to the unique contract (MDA), leading to an incorrect computation of damages.

Reference to Precedents: The judgment referred to various precedents underlining the necessity of proving actual loss in damage claims, emphasizing that this forms the essence of a valid claim for damages under contract law.

Decision: The High Court, acknowledging these substantial legal missteps, granted an unconditional stay on the arbitral award, finding it to be patently illegal and perverse. The hearing of the arbitration petition was expedited.

 

Date of Decision: 5 February 2024

Alkem Laboratories Limited Vs Issar Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Limited

Latest Legal News