Whether A Signed Copy Or Certified Copy Of The Award, Purpose Of S. 31(5) of A&C Act Is To Inform The Party: Bombay High Court
1 year, 11 months ago

Whether A Signed Copy Or Certified Copy Of The Award, Purpose Of S. 31(5) of A&C Act Is To Inform The Party: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the purpose of Section 31 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which provides for delivery of the signed copy of the arbitral award, is of imparting knowledge to the party regarding the contents of the award, and to make the party aware that the limitation to raise a challenge has started to run. Thus, the Court remarked that the purpose of Section 31 is achieved whether a signed copy is delivered or a certified copy of the signed award is obtained by the party. The bench ruled the said interpretation would defeat the very purpose and object of the A&C Act itself, as once a ‘party’ is held to have received/obtained the signed copy/ certified copy of the award, the information regarding the contents of the award stands attributed to the party, and therefore, the time would begin to run for raising a challenge to the award. “Once that time has expired, it cannot be permitted to be said that though a certified signed copy was obtained by the ‘party’, from the Arbitrator, still the time under Section 33 or 34 of the A & C Act, did not run and expire, as a signed copy of the award, in terms of Section 31 was not delivered to the ‘party’,” the court said.

High Court Bombay High Court Party Application Act Bombay High Award Signed Copy Certified Section 34 Section 36  315  application  purpose  inform  bombay  high  court  act  party  copy  signed  ac  s  certified  award

History of this topic

Application U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Not Maintainable If Not Filed With Copy Of Arbitral Award: Delhi High Court
Trending News
1 week, 3 days ago

Application U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Not Maintainable If Not Filed With Copy Of Arbitral Award: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan has held that an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is non-maintainable if it is not accompanied by a copy of the impugned award. The Single Judge after examining the material on record held that the original petition filed under Section …

Failure To Attach Impugned Arbitral Award Along With Section 34 Application Would Render Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court
Trending News
1 month, 1 week ago

Failure To Attach Impugned Arbitral Award Along With Section 34 Application Would Render Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

Submissions: The counsel for the appellant made the following submissions: Section 34 of the A&C Act does not mandate the filing of the arbitral award. The counsel for the respondent made the following submissions: This Court consistently held that non-fling of the impugned arbitral award would render the filing u/s 34 of the A&C Act as “non-est,” as the Court …

Failure To Attach Impugned Arbitral Award Along With Section 34 Application Would Render Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court
Trending News
1 month, 1 week ago

Failure To Attach Impugned Arbitral Award Along With Section 34 Application Would Render Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

Submissions: The counsel for the appellant made the following submissions: Section 34 of the A&C Act does not mandate the filing of the arbitral award. The counsel for the respondent made the following submissions: This Court consistently held that non-fling of the impugned arbitral award would render the filing u/s 34 of the A&C Act as “non-est,” as the Court …

Serving Signed Copy Of Award To Employee Of Party Does Not Constitute Valid Service U/S 31(5) Of Arbitration Act: Bombay High Court
2 months, 1 week ago

Serving Signed Copy Of Award To Employee Of Party Does Not Constitute Valid Service U/S 31(5) Of Arbitration Act: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court bench of Justices A.S. Chandurkar and Rajesh S. Patil has held that service of a signed copy of an award on an employee of a party to an arbitration agreement is not a valid service under section 31 of the Arbitration Act. Contentions: The appellants submitted that as per section 31 of the Arbitration Act, the …

Non Filing Of Arbitral Award Along Section 34 Is A Fatal Defect, Makes Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court Dismisses Section 34 Petition
1 year ago

Non Filing Of Arbitral Award Along Section 34 Is A Fatal Defect, Makes Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court Dismisses Section 34 Petition

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Prateek Jalan held that non filing of the arbitral award along with the Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is a fatal defect, making such filing as non-est. Brief Facts: The Petitioner approached the Delhi High Court and filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration …

Signed Arbitral Award Served On Lawyer Or Agent Of The Party Doesn't Constitute A Valid Delivery : Delhi High Court
1 year, 2 months ago

Signed Arbitral Award Served On Lawyer Or Agent Of The Party Doesn't Constitute A Valid Delivery : Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi has held that a copy of the signed arbitral award served only on the lawyer or the agent of the party does not constitute a valid delivery in absence of the delivery on the party itself. The Appellant/MoHFW challenged both the Arbitral Award and the Corrigendum Order before the learned Single Judge under Section 34 …

Sending Scanned Copy Of A Signed Arbitral Award Through Email Constitutes A Valid Delivery Under Section 31(5) Of The A&C Act: Delhi High Court
1 year, 6 months ago

Sending Scanned Copy Of A Signed Arbitral Award Through Email Constitutes A Valid Delivery Under Section 31(5) Of The A&C Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has held that an email sent by the arbitral tribunal to the parties wherein the scanned copy of the signed award is attached constitutes a valid delivery of the award under Section 31 of the A&C Act. The Court observed that although the first correction to the award was made on 07.03.2018 but it was delivered …

Supplying Copies Of Award Certified By MSME Council To The Parties, Not Fair: Himachal Pradesh High Court
1 year, 9 months ago

Supplying Copies Of Award Certified By MSME Council To The Parties, Not Fair: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has ruled that it is the bounden duty of the Arbitrator appointed by the Facilitation Council under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 to issue signed copies of the arbitral award to the parties irrespective of the fact whether the parties have contested the proceedings or were proceeded ex-parte. Since the signed …

Award Debtor Failed To Take Recourse To S. 26 of Arbitration Act; Cannot Challenge Award Claiming Expert Was Not Examined: Bombay High Court
2 years, 2 months ago

Award Debtor Failed To Take Recourse To S. 26 of Arbitration Act; Cannot Challenge Award Claiming Expert Was Not Examined: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that if an award debtor has failed to take recourse to the provisions of Section 26 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, it cannot seek to set aside the award on the ground that the expert, whose report was relied upon by the arbitrator, was not examined by the opposite party. The petitioner, …

Delivery Of Arbitration Award To Employee/ Agent Of Party, Not A Valid Delivery Under Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
2 years, 2 months ago

Delivery Of Arbitration Award To Employee/ Agent Of Party, Not A Valid Delivery Under Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that delivery of arbitral award, to be effective under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, must be made to a person who has direct knowledge of the arbitral proceedings. Challenging the arbitral award, the petitioner filed a petition under Section 34 of the A&C Act before the Delhi High Court. The petitioner, Monika Oli, …

‘Limitation’ Doesn’t Involve Any “Basic Notions Of Morality Or Justice”, For Setting Aside Award : Bombay High Court
2 years, 2 months ago

‘Limitation’ Doesn’t Involve Any “Basic Notions Of Morality Or Justice”, For Setting Aside Award : Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that the ground of limitation, being a mixed question of law and fact, can never be a ground which would involve any “basic notions of morality or justice” for setting aside an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petitioner, Thomas Cook, submitted before the High Court that …

Award Against Guarantor Who Is Not Member Of Multi State Co-Op Society, Without Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court
2 years, 2 months ago

Award Against Guarantor Who Is Not Member Of Multi State Co-Op Society, Without Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has set aside an award passed pursuant to an arbitral reference made under Section 84 of the Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002, since the award debtor was not a member of the Co-operative Society. The petitioner challenged that arbitral award by filing a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act before the Bombay …

Venue Restriction Provision Contained In Section 42 of A&C Act, Not Applicable To Proceedings Seeking Enforcement Of Award: Delhi High Court
2 years, 3 months ago

Venue Restriction Provision Contained In Section 42 of A&C Act, Not Applicable To Proceedings Seeking Enforcement Of Award: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has reiterated that Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 would have no application to proceedings seeking enforcement of arbitral award. The petitioner/ award holder Ramacivil India Constructions filed a petition before the Delhi High Court seeking enforcement of the arbitral award passed by the Sole Arbitrator. Referring to the decision of the Division …

Reliance On Evidence Filed After Conclusion Of Hearing; Award Is Patently Illegal: Bombay High Court
2 years, 5 months ago

Reliance On Evidence Filed After Conclusion Of Hearing; Award Is Patently Illegal: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that where the only documentary material relied upon by the claimant in the arbitral proceedings, is introduced on record surreptitiously and after the conclusion of hearing, the arbitral award is vitiated on account of patent illegality. The Court ruled that the said sale deeds were introduced on record behind the back of NHAI, after …

Mere Erroneous Application Of Law; Award Need Not Be Set Aside: Bombay High Court
2 years, 7 months ago

Mere Erroneous Application Of Law; Award Need Not Be Set Aside: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has reiterated that when the court is convinced that the Arbitrator has erred only on specific issues and that the arbitral award is otherwise sustainable, the court is not mandatorily required to set aside the entire award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Single Bench of Justice Manish Pitale ruled that …

Amendment To Section 34 Application Of The A&C Act Would Not Be Permissible If It Intends A New Challenge: Bombay High Court
2 years, 8 months ago

Amendment To Section 34 Application Of The A&C Act Would Not Be Permissible If It Intends A New Challenge: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Aurangabad Bench of Bombay High Court has held that an amendment to the application under Section 34 of the A&C Act would not be allowed if it leads to absolutely new grounds to challenge the award. The Court further held that the benefit of the decision of the Supreme Court in Ellora Paper Mills Limited Vs. State of Madhya …

Writ Petition Is Not Maintainable To Enforce The Arbitral Award: Madras High Court
2 years, 11 months ago

Writ Petition Is Not Maintainable To Enforce The Arbitral Award: Madras High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Madras observed that a writ petition cannot be filed to enforce an arbitral award when an alternative remedy is available under S. 36 of the A&C Act. Therefore, the petitioners filed the writ petition for a direction to the respondent to pay the arbitral award. The respondent contended that the writ petition is not maintainable on …

Oral Evidence In Application To Set Aside Arbitral Award Shouldn’t Be Allowed Unless Absolutely Necessary: SC [Read Judgment]
6 years, 7 months ago

Oral Evidence In Application To Set Aside Arbitral Award Shouldn’t Be Allowed Unless Absolutely Necessary: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

‘However, if there are matters not contained in such record, and are relevant to the determination of issues arising under Section 34, they may be brought to the notice of the Court by way of affidavits filed by both parties.’The Supreme Court has held that an application for setting aside an arbitral award will not ordinarily require anything beyond the …

Oral Evidence In Application To Set Aside Arbitral Award Shouldn’t Be Allowed Unless Absolutely Necessary: SC [Read Judgment]
6 years, 7 months ago

Oral Evidence In Application To Set Aside Arbitral Award Shouldn’t Be Allowed Unless Absolutely Necessary: SC [Read Judgment]

Live Law  

‘However, if there are matters not contained in such record, and are relevant to the determination of issues arising under Section 34, they may be brought to the notice of the Court by way of affidavits filed by both parties.’The Supreme Court has held that an application for setting aside an arbitral award will not ordinarily require anything beyond the …

Discover Related