ANUPAM MITTAL v WESTBRIDGE VENTURES II INVESTMENT HOLDINGS

Q: Which legislation does [2023] SGCA 1 consider?

The judgment refers to Arbitration Act (Cap 10), International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A), and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

[2023] SGCA 1 Court of Appeal 6 January 2023 CA/CA 64/2021 60 min read

7 cases cited (5 SG, 2 foreign)

Outcome

Appeal dismissed

we dismiss the appeal and maintain the anti-suit injunction in the terms ordered by the Judge.

Source: [2023] SGCA 1, Court of Appeal, decided 6 January 2023. Read directly from the judgment.

Key facts

Court	Court of Appeal
Decided	6 January 2023
Judges	Judith Prakash, Steven Chong, Sundaresh Menon
Charges / claim	Arbitration, Civil Procedure
Outcome	Appeal dismissed
Counsel	School of Law, Singapore Management University, TSMP Law Corporation, Wong & Leow LLC, Ashish Chugh, Darius Chan, Juliana Lake (Lu Zhixuan), Nandakumar Ponniya Servai, Pradeep Nair, Tan May Lian Felicia, Thio Shen Yi, Uma Jitendra Sharma, Yap Yong Li, Yiu Kai Tai

Source: [2023] SGCA 1, Court of Appeal, decided 6 January 2023 — eLitigation. Updated 10 July 2026.

Catchwords

Arbitration — Agreement — Scope Civil Procedure — Stay of proceedings Arbitration — Arbitrability and public policy Arbitration — Interlocutory order or direction — Injunction

Practice Areas

Arbitration Civil Procedure

Judges (3)

Judith Prakash Delivered Steven Chong Coram Sundaresh Menon Coram

Counsel (13)

School of Law, Singapore Management University Firm TSMP Law Corporation Firm Wong & Leow LLC Firm Ashish Chugh Counsel Appellant Darius Chan Counsel Third Party Juliana Lake (Lu Zhixuan) Counsel Respondent Nandakumar Ponniya Servai Counsel Appellant Pradeep Nair Counsel Appellant Tan May Lian Felicia Counsel Respondent Thio Shen Yi Counsel Respondent Uma Jitendra Sharma Counsel Respondent Yap Yong Li Counsel Appellant Yiu Kai Tai Counsel Appellant

Parties (2)

Westbridge Ventures II Investment Holdings Respondent Anupam Mittal Appellant

Case Significance

Anupam Mittal v Westbridge Ventures II Investment Holdings [2023] SGCA 1 was decided in the Court of Appeal (Civil Appeal No 64 of 2021) by Sundaresh Menon CJ, Judith Prakash JCA and Steven Chong JCA, heard on 29 June and 5 September 2022, with Judith Prakash JCA delivering the reserved judgment on 6 January 2023. In the underlying High Court proceedings (OS 242), the court granted a permanent anti-suit injunction restraining the appellant Anupam Mittal from pursuing Company Petition No 92 of 2021 before the National Company Law Tribunal in Mumbai, India, and from other proceedings relating to the management of People Interactive (India) Private Limited, of which the appellant and respondent are shareholders. The central issue on appeal was whether commencing the NCLT Proceedings breached an arbitration agreement, with catchwords covering arbitration agreement scope, arbitrability and public policy, injunctions, and stay of proceedings.

[2023] SGCA 1 explained

ANUPAM MITTAL v WESTBRIDGE VENTURES II INVESTMENT HOLDINGS ([2023] SGCA 1) is a Singapore judgment decided by the Court of Appeal on 6 January 2023. It is categorised under Arbitration and Civil Procedure. It is a recent decision; within this corpus no later judgment has cited it yet. This page summarises what the reported decision covers and links the primary sources — the full judgment, the statutes it cites, and the other cases it engages with — so the decision can be read in context. It is reference information, not legal advice, and it does not state the outcome or any holding beyond what the official judgment records.

What is [2023] SGCA 1 about?

ANUPAM MITTAL v WESTBRIDGE VENTURES II INVESTMENT HOLDINGS ([2023] SGCA 1) is a Court of Appeal decision from 2023. Its published catchwords are “Arbitration — Agreement — Scope”, “Civil Procedure — Stay of proceedings”, “Arbitration — Arbitrability and public policy”, and “Arbitration — Interlocutory order or direction — Injunction”, which indicate the subject matter the judgment addresses. The full reasoning and orders are in the judgment itself, linked below.

Which legislation does [2023] SGCA 1 consider?

The judgment refers to Arbitration Act (Cap 10), International Arbitration Act (Cap 143A), and Supreme Court of Judicature Act (Cap 322). The statutes cited are listed in full on this page, each linking to its primary text.

What was Anupam Mittal v Westbridge Ventures II Investment Holdings [2023] SGCA 1 about?

Decided by the Court of Appeal on 6 January 2023, it concerned whether Anupam Mittal breached an arbitration agreement by commencing proceedings before the National Company Law Tribunal in Mumbai, raising questions of the arbitration agreement's scope, arbitrability, public policy and anti-suit injunctions.

What was the appellant's argument in Anupam Mittal v Westbridge Ventures ([2023] SGCA 1)?

The appellant argued no breach occurred because the disputes referred to the NCLT concerned oppression and mismanagement of a company, which he said were non-arbitrable under Indian law, which he averred governed the arbitration agreement, and that in any case they fell outside the agreement's scope.