The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has upheld key parts of a roughly $1.2 billion judgment against Antrix Corp., the commercial arm of the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO), in the long-running dispute involving Devas Multimedia.

The appeals court rejected Antrix’s arguments that the case should be heard in India and that US courts lacked jurisdiction over the Indian company. However, it stopped short of deciding whether the annulment of the original arbitration award by Indian courts should affect enforcement of the US judgment.

That question has now been sent back to the US district court for further consideration.

Why is Antrix facing a $1.2 billion US judgment?

The dispute stems from a 2005 agreement between Antrix and Devas Multimedia under which Antrix agreed to provide satellite capacity to the company.

Antrix terminated the agreement in 2011, prompting Devas to initiate international arbitration proceedings.

In 2015, an International Chamber of Commerce tribunal awarded Devas about $562.5 million in damages after finding that Antrix had wrongfully terminated the agreement.

The amount subsequently increased substantially because of interest. In 2020, a US district court confirmed the arbitration award and entered a judgment of about $1.293 billion against Antrix.

Thus, the $562.5 million figure refers to the original arbitration award, while the roughly $1.2 billion to $1.29 billion figure reflects the later US judgment with accumulated interest.

Why did the Ninth Circuit reject Antrix’s arguments?

Antrix had argued that the dispute should be dealt with in India rather than the US. The Ninth Circuit rejected that argument, holding that the forum non conveniens doctrine did not apply to proceedings seeking confirmation of a foreign arbitration award under the New York Convention.

The appeals court also rejected Antrix’s challenge to US jurisdiction.

The case involves the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which provides exceptions allowing certain arbitration-related claims against foreign state entities to proceed in US courts. The Ninth Circuit concluded that the relevant exception applied and that the US court could exercise personal jurisdiction over Antrix.

The issue had gained further importance following a 2025 US Supreme Court ruling in the dispute. The Supreme Court held that personal jurisdiction can exist when a Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act exception applies and the foreign entity has been properly served.

Court rejects challenge to arbitration award

The Ninth Circuit also dismissed Antrix’s argument that the arbitration proceedings had failed to comply with the companies’ agreement.

The court found that Antrix had not established sufficient grounds under the New York Convention to prevent confirmation of the arbitration award.

As a result, the appeals court has left the US judgment standing rather than overturning the confirmation of the award.

What about India’s annulment of the award?

This remains the central unresolved issue.

Indian courts subsequently set aside the arbitration award. The decision became final after the Supreme Court of India declined to review the matter in October 2023.

Antrix argued that the annulment in India should prevent US courts from continuing to enforce the arbitration award.

The Ninth Circuit, however, did not issue a final ruling on that question. Instead, it returned the matter to the district court to determine what legal effect, if any, the Indian annulment should have on the existing US judgment.

This means the appeals court has preserved the US confirmation of the award while leaving open the possibility that the Indian court decision could affect enforcement.

Devas judgment registration issue

The Ninth Circuit also addressed efforts by Devas to register the US judgment against assets connected to Antrix.

It upheld the registration of the judgment by Devas Multimedia America Inc. in Virginia, where assets linked to Antrix had been identified.

However, the court rejected nationwide registration of the judgment and ruled that Devas shareholder companies did not have standing to register the judgment themselves.

The dispute will now return to the US district court, which must consider whether and how India’s annulment of the arbitration award affects enforcement of the US judgment.

For now, the Ninth Circuit has upheld the key parts of the roughly $1.2 billion judgment and rejected Antrix’s jurisdictional and procedural challenges.

The Devas-Antrix dispute, which began with a satellite agreement signed in 2005, therefore remains unresolved more than two decades later, with courts in India and the US continuing to grapple with the consequences of the arbitration award.