SC dismisses ex-PwC chairman’s appeal in final settlement dispute
ANI
Synopsis
The Supreme Court has dismissed Shyamal Mukherjee's appeal against PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) India, upholding a Karnataka High Court order concerning final settlement benefits. Mukherjee, a former chairman of PwC India, filed the appeal under the Arbitration Act, but the court rejected it. PwC had proactively filed a caveat to ensure they could be heard in case of such a challenge.
By Maulik Vyas, ET Bureau
The Supreme Court on Thrusday dismissed an appeal filed by Shyamal Mukherjee, a former chairman of PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) India, against the audit and consulting major, challenging a Karnataka High Court order in a dispute regarding the final settlement benefits.
As per the details mentioned on the Supreme Court website, the case was filed on May 16 by Mukherjee through his counsel Pritha Srikumar Iyer under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act 1940 and the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996.
Ashish K Singh, managing partner of law firm Capstone Legal, said Section 8 empowers any judicial authority to refer the parties to arbitration. “The provision also provides that there should be a valid and binding arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties,” said Singh. “This clause is often exercised along with the appointment of an arbitrator either by the court or by consent of the parties,” he adds.
Mukherjee didn’t respond immediately to the ET query.
The audit major, Price Waterhouse Coopers Services LLP, had already filed a caveat in March 2025 against Mukherjee, as shown on the Apex Court website.
The caveat was filed to ensure that if Mukherjee files a case to challenge the high court order, the audit and accounting major gets a chance to be heard before the court passes any order.
ADVERTISEMENT
The division bench of Chief Justice of India Bhushan Gavai and Justice Augustine George Masih dismissed an appeal filed by Mukherjee, which challenged the Karnataka High Court order. As per the details mentioned on the Supreme Court website, the case was filed on May 16 by Mukherjee through his counsel Pritha Srikumar Iyer under Section 8 of the Arbitration Act 1940 and the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996.
Ashish K Singh, managing partner of law firm Capstone Legal, said Section 8 empowers any judicial authority to refer the parties to arbitration. “The provision also provides that there should be a valid and binding arbitration clause in the agreement between the parties,” said Singh. “This clause is often exercised along with the appointment of an arbitrator either by the court or by consent of the parties,” he adds.
Mukherjee didn’t respond immediately to the ET query.
The audit major, Price Waterhouse Coopers Services LLP, had already filed a caveat in March 2025 against Mukherjee, as shown on the Apex Court website.
ADVERTISEMENT
The caveat was filed to ensure that if Mukherjee files a case to challenge the high court order, the audit and accounting major gets a chance to be heard before the court passes any order.
(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel)
