MODIFICATION AND SEVERABILITY OF ARBITRAL AWARDS
This article examines the challenges surrounding judicial modification and severability of arbitral awards under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It outlines the limited recourse available to parties against an arbitral award, and charts judicial developments on the questions of modification and severability in context of the principle of minimal judicial intervention embedded in arbitration law. In conclusion, the article argues that while the legislative framework seeks to preserve the finality of arbitral awards, practical challenges and prolonged litigation compel courts to engage in selective and substantive intervention with arbitral awards. It suggests that a balanced approach – potentially via legislative amendment – could reconcile the need for judicial oversight with the principle of minimal interference, thereby ensuring speedy and equitable dispute resolution.
IMPACT OF IBC ON FINANCIAL SERVICES AND EVOLVING BUSINESS DYNAMICS
The banking and financial services sector of India forms the backbone of the Indian economy. With over ₹150 lakh crore in outstanding advances, this sector has driven industrial growth, supported infrastructure development, and nurtured new businesses. However, rising non-performing assets (NPAs), prolonged recovery timelines, and the misuse of outdated laws had created some sort of crisis of confidence in the system before the advent of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code in 2016 (IBC). Before implementation the IBC, Indian banks faced significant challenges in recovering non-performing assets (NPAs). The primary mechanisms available were the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act, Debt Recovery Tribunals (DRTs), and Lok Adalats. However, these avenues often resulted in prolonged recovery processes and low recovery rates.
REVITALIZING INDIA’S SEZs: CHALLENGES AND STRATEGIC POLICY SHIFTS
In today’s rapidly evolving global economy, nations are constantly seeking innovative ways to attract investment, create jobs, and boost exports. Special Economic Zones (SEZs) have emerged as a cornerstone of these strategies, offering a unique combination of trade regulations and incentives to stimulate economic growth. Inspired by the success of China’s SEZ model, India introduced its own version with high expectations. However, despite significant investments and a host of policy initiatives, India’s SEZ framework has yet to deliver the anticipated economic benefits. This article explores the evolution of India’s SEZ policy, compares it to China’s highly successful model, analyzes the challenges and limitations India has faced, and offers recommendations for reform. By doing so, we aim to uncover how India can recalibrate its SEZ policies to foster more sustainable economic growth in the future.
RETHINKING DUAL-CLASS SHARES IN INDIA: BRIDGING THE GAP THROUGH EQUAL TREATMENT AGREEMENTS
The dual-class share (DCS) structure has emerged as a contentious governance model, balancing the competing priorities of entrepreneurial autonomy and shareholder rights. By granting founders disproportionate voting rights while diluting the influence of public shareholders, DCS frameworks challenge the traditional principle of shareholder democracy, where voting power aligns with economic interest. While proponents argue that this structure protects visionary leadership from short-term market pressures, critics highlight its potential to erode accountability and compromise market efficiency.