In corporate and commercial disputes, Indian courts apply the principle against splitting of causes under Order II Rule 2 CPC to prevent fragmented litigation but recognize flexibility when multiple independent contracts or arbitration clauses exist. The Bombay High Court in Sukanya Holdings Pvt. Ltd. v. Jayesh H. Pandya clarified that partial reference of interlinked disputes to arbitration is impermissible when issues or parties overlap, emphasizing procedural unity for transactional fairness. However, in Taru Meghani v. Shree Tirupathi, the same court allowed separation where contracts created distinct obligations, showing that efficiency can coexist with jurisdictional consistency. To protect client interests, top lawyers adopt strategic contract clustering, consolidate related claims, include broad consolidation clauses, and align arbitration agreements across contracts to avoid conflicting verdicts. They also maintain documentary coherence and consistent pleading structures, ensuring every contractual right and remedy is pursued in a unified yet legally compliant manner that upholds commercial certainty and efficient adjudication.
