Selection Academy - Lectures on Law

When does a wrong decision become illegal? More importantly, can a court set aside an arbitral award simply because it disagrees with the arbitrator?

In this episode, we explore the doctrine of Patent Illegality and understand how Indian arbitration law has evolved from protecting contracts to protecting the finality of arbitral awards. Rather than treating case law as isolated judgments, we follow the journey of the doctrine and the reasoning behind each landmark decision.

The episode discusses the evolution of Patent Illegality through:

1. ONGC Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd. – Introduction of Patent Illegality as a ground of challenge.

2. Associate Builders v. Delhi Development Authority – Limits of judicial interference, perversity and the Possible View Doctrine.

3. The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 – Introduction of Section 34(2A) and statutory recognition of Patent Illegality.

4. Ssangyong Engineering v. NHAI – Narrowing the scope of judicial review after the 2015 Amendment.

5. Jan De Nul Dredging India Pvt. Ltd. v. Tuticorin Port Authority – Reaffirming that courts cannot reassess merits, rewrite contracts, or interfere merely because another interpretation appears preferable.

In this episode, you'll understand:

1. Why Patent Illegality was introduced

2. The difference between review and appeal

3. Why courts do not re-appreciate evidence

4. The relationship between Patent Illegality and the Possible View Doctrine

5. How the Supreme Court's approach has evolved from Saw Pipes to Jan De Nul

Because arbitration is not about finding the perfect decision—it is about ensuring that the decision remains within the boundaries of law.

Agreement padha tha na? It sounds like a simple question, but when an arbitrator awards ₹5 Crores instead of a contractually agreed ₹10 Lakhs, things get complicated. ​In this episode, we break down the complex legal doctrine of Patent Illegality in Indian Arbitration Law. From the dramatic shift in ONGC v. Saw Pipes to the guardrails set by the 2015 Amendment and Ssangyong Engineering, we explore how the legal system balances party autonomy with absolute lawlessness. Think of it as the ultimate emergency brake when an arbitration award goes completely off the rails. Tune in to understand why every wrong award isn't a patent illegality, and why legality will always remain a public concern.

What happens when two reasonable people look at the same contract, the same evidence, and reach different conclusions?

Can a court set aside an arbitral award simply because it prefers another interpretation?

In this episode, we explore the Possible View Doctrine, one of the most important principles in arbitration law. Using simple examples and a memorable analogy from Majnu Bhai's painting in Welcome, we understand why courts do not interfere with an arbitral award merely because another view is possible.

We also discuss the landmark judgments of Associate Builders v. Delhi Development Authority, Ssangyong Engineering v. NHAI and Jan De Nul Dredging India Pvt. Ltd. v. Tuticorin Port Trust.

What happens when an arbitration award is not just wrong, but clearly unreasonable and legally unacceptable?

In this episode, we explain the concept of Patent Illegality in very simple language using everyday life examples, contracts, and famous arbitration cases. Learn the difference between a simple mistake and a legal error so serious that a court can cancel the arbitral award.

Featuring important cases like ONGC Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd., Associate Builders v. Delhi Development Authority, and Ssangyong Engineering v. NHAI.

A simple and relatable conversation about arbitration, fairness, contracts, and how courts decide when an award becomes legally unsustainable.

sorry, there is a correction

it's Section 4 of BNS,2023.

Why do people read messages instantly but reply hours later?

Can silence, blue ticks, delayed emails, or WhatsApp chats become legal evidence?

In this episode, we break down the fascinating concept of Res Gestae in the simplest way possible through real-life examples, digital behaviour, arbitration, and modern communication. Learn how courts and arbitrators look beyond words and examine timestamps, conduct, instant reactions, and strategic silence to understand the truth behind disputes.

Featuring insights from landmark cases like ONGC Ltd. v. Saw Pipes Ltd., Associate Builders v. Delhi Development Authority, and Ssangyong Engineering v. NHAI along with the approach under the International Bar Association.

A conversation about law, psychology, human behaviour, and the digital footprints we leave behind every day.

Let’s be honest — most CLAT students don’t even ask the real question.

They join coaching, open books, memorize facts… and months later wonder,

“Why am I still not improving?”

The truth is simple — CLAT isn’t about how much you study. It’s about how deeply you think.

In this episode, we’ll talk about the most ignored skill that decides your CLAT result —

Critical Thinking.

I’ll show you how every courtroom drama — from a real murder case to a simple lemonade stall dispute — is nothing but an exercise in thinking clearly, spotting assumptions, and reasoning logically.

And once you get this, you’ll naturally ask the golden question every smart student should ask:

👉 “Ma’am, if everything depends on critical thinking, then why does CLAT have Legal, Logical, and English sections?”

That’s where your preparation transforms —

Legal Aptitude trains you to apply the law.

Logical Reasoning builds the structure of your mind.

English gives you the language to express law.

This episode isn’t just about cracking CLAT — it’s about thinking like a lawyer before you become one.

🎧 Tune in and rethink the way you study. Because memory fades — clarity stays.

Selection Academy — where teaching isn’t a business, it’s my passion.

Physical and online classes available