Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside Merely On The Ground Of Erroneous Application Of Law Or Misappreciation Of Evidence : Supreme Court
2 years, 11 months ago

Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside Merely On The Ground Of Erroneous Application Of Law Or Misappreciation Of Evidence : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court, on Wednesday, held that apart from the grounds mentioned in Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 2013, an arbitral award can be set aside only when it is vitiated by patent illegality, and not on ground of erroneous application of law or by misappreciation of evidence. A Bench comprising Justices Ajay Rastogi and Sanjiv Khanna allowed an appeal assailing the order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which had affirmed the order of the District Judge that the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and the Conciliation Act, 1996 was, inter alia, barred by limitation. In April, 2012, the respondent filed an application under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act before the Punjab and Haryana High Court for appointment of an arbitrator. The Court was of the view that as per Section 34 an arbitral award can be set aside only when it is vitiated by patent illegality and if it satisfies the grounds enumerated under Section 34, but not merely on ground of erroneous application of law or by misappreciation of evidence.

Court Application Delay Respondent Punjab District Act Ground Award Karnal Haryana High Court Erroneous Application  evidence  ground  court  order  act  set  award  erroneous  arbitration  supreme  district  application  appellant  misappreciation  merely  law  delay  respondent

History of this topic

Arbitrator's Mandate Can Be Extended If Non-Completion Of Proceedings In 12 Months Is Due To Delays Not Attributable To Petitioner: Himachal Pradesh HC
5 days, 9 hours ago

Arbitrator's Mandate Can Be Extended If Non-Completion Of Proceedings In 12 Months Is Due To Delays Not Attributable To Petitioner: Himachal Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Ranjan Sharma has held that the mandate of the Arbitrator can be extended under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 if the arbitral proceedings are not completed within 12 months due to reasons not attributable to the petitioner, as failing to do so would cause grave prejudice to the …

Setting Aside Of Arbitral Award Leaves It Open To Parties To Choose To Arbitrate Again: Bombay High Court
1 week, 4 days ago

Setting Aside Of Arbitral Award Leaves It Open To Parties To Choose To Arbitrate Again: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court Bench of Justice Somsekhar Sundaresan has observed that once an arbitral award has been set aside by the court in the exercise of its powers under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the parties would be restored to the original position and a fresh arbitration in such circumstances would not amount …

Arbitral Tribunal Is Sole Judge Of Evidence, Court Not Required To Re-Evaluate Evidence U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
1 week, 5 days ago

Arbitral Tribunal Is Sole Judge Of Evidence, Court Not Required To Re-Evaluate Evidence U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tejas Karia held that the arbitrator is the ultimate master of the quantity and quality of evidence to be relied upon when he delivers his arbitral award. Also, the Court held that it is not required to reappreciate or reevaluate the evidence and reagitate the disputes under Section 34 …

Application U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Not Maintainable If Not Filed With Copy Of Arbitral Award: Delhi High Court
Trending News
1 week, 5 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 …

Order Passed U/S 23(3) Of Arbitration Act Is Procedural & Not An Interim Award, Cannot Be Challenged U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
1 week, 5 days ago

Order Passed U/S 23(3) Of Arbitration Act Is Procedural & Not An Interim Award, Cannot Be Challenged U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that an order dismissing an application under Section 23 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act is only a procedural order and does not qualify as an 'interim award' amenable to challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act Brief Facts of the case: The petitioner issued a …

Arbitral Awards Can Be Granted On The Basis Of Evidentiary Admissions: Delhi High Court
2 weeks, 5 days ago

Arbitral Awards Can Be Granted On The Basis Of Evidentiary Admissions: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Prateek Jalan has observed that the power to pass an award on admissions is wide, and evidentiary admissions can also form the basis of an arbitral award. However, to hold that there is a bar on granting an award of admissions in the case of evidentiary admissions would be inconsistent with the text …

Arbitration Clause Cannot Be Invoked Again Over Matters Which Have Already Been Adjudicated: Karnataka High Court
3 weeks, 1 day ago

Arbitration Clause Cannot Be Invoked Again Over Matters Which Have Already Been Adjudicated: Karnataka High Court

Live Law  

The Karnataka High Court has said the Arbitration clause in the lease agreement cannot be invoked for matters that have already been adjudicated upon and concluded by both the Arbitral Tribunal and the competent courts. The respondent challenged the award before the jurisdictional District and Sessions Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which set aside …

Time Spent Before 'Wrong' Court Excluded U/S 14 Of Limitation Act While Calculating Limitation Period U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
3 weeks, 3 days ago

Time Spent Before 'Wrong' Court Excluded U/S 14 Of Limitation Act While Calculating Limitation Period U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Dharmesh Sharma has held that during the calculation of the limitation period of three months for the application under Section 34 of the Act, the time during which the applicant was prosecuting such application before the wrong court is excluded. Brief Facts of the case: The appellant has filed an appeal under Section …

Arbitral Award Not Signed By All Members Of Tribunal Can Be Set Aside If Reasons For Omission Of Missing Signature Are Not Stated: Delhi High Court
1 month ago

Arbitral Award Not Signed By All Members Of Tribunal Can Be Set Aside If Reasons For Omission Of Missing Signature Are Not Stated: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Prateek Jalan has observed that the signature of all members of the arbitral tribunal should be available on the award as the signing of an award is not a ministerial act but a substantive requirement. The requirement is referable to the need to ensure that all members of the tribunal have had an …

Mere Non-Mentioning Of Place Of Arbitration In Arbitral Award Does Not Vitiate It: Allahabad High Court
1 month ago

Mere Non-Mentioning Of Place Of Arbitration In Arbitral Award Does Not Vitiate It: Allahabad High Court

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court has held that mere non-mentioning of the place of arbitration in the arbitral award does not vitiate it. Per contra, counsel for Motilal Nehru National Institute of Technology, Allahabad challenged the order of the Commercial Court on grounds that the award was not dealt with on its merits. “Once the agreement between the parties in this …

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 …

Plea That Signed Copy Of Award Was Not Received Cannot Be Raised For First Time In Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act: Gujarat High Court
1 month, 1 week ago

Plea That Signed Copy Of Award Was Not Received Cannot Be Raised For First Time In Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act: Gujarat High Court

Live Law  

The Gujarat High Court bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi has held that the plea that limitation period for challenging the award under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 did not start as the signed copy of the award was not received by the party, cannot be raised for the first time in …

Award Cannot Be Set Aside When No Objections Were Raised Before Arbitrator Or Court U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Award Cannot Be Set Aside When No Objections Were Raised Before Arbitrator Or Court U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices C. Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul held that the award cannot be set aside solely on the ground that the appointment of the Arbitrator was illegal in view of section 12 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act when no such objections were raised before the Arbitrator or the court under section 34 of …

Execution Proceedings Can't Be Quashed Solely Due To Non-Supply Of Signed Arbitral Award: Chhattisgarh High Court
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Execution Proceedings Can't Be Quashed Solely Due To Non-Supply Of Signed Arbitral Award: Chhattisgarh High Court

Live Law  

The Chhattisgarh High Court bench of Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey has held that non-supply of the signed arbitral award may be a ground for setting aside an award, but on this ground alone, the execution proceedings cannot be quashed. The respondent Bank filed an application for execution under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with Order …

Arbitral Award Can't Have Specific Format; Reasoning Must Be 'Proper', 'Intelligible' And 'Adequate' : Madras High Court
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Arbitral Award Can't Have Specific Format; Reasoning Must Be 'Proper', 'Intelligible' And 'Adequate' : Madras High Court

Live Law  

The Madras High Court bench comprising Justice K..R. Shriram and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy have observed that an arbitral award does not have to follow any specific format; just as every judge writes their judgment in a particular style, arbitrators also write in different styles. Brief Facts The Appellant filed the appeal challenging an order dated 26.4.2023 passed by a Single …

Supreme Court Reiterates Narrow Scope Of Interference Under Section 37 Arbitration Act
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Supreme Court Reiterates Narrow Scope Of Interference Under Section 37 Arbitration Act

Live Law  

The Supreme Court reiterated that in appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the Court has a narrower scope to review the arbitral award if the award has already been upheld under Section 34. In appeal, Section 37 of the Act grants narrower scope to the appellate court to review the findings in an award, if it …

Arbitration Act | Appellate Courts Can't Reassess Awards, Must Limit Enquiry On Public Policy Breach : Supreme Court
2 months ago

Arbitration Act | Appellate Courts Can't Reassess Awards, Must Limit Enquiry On Public Policy Breach : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court reaffirmed that arbitral awards should only be interfered with in cases of perversity, violation of public policy, or patent illegality. It emphasized that appellate courts cannot reassess the merits of awards and must limit their inquiry to whether the award breaches Section 34 of the Arbitration Act i.e., if the award is against the public policy of …

Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act Not Maintainable Against Order Under O.VII R.10 CPC: Punjab And Haryana High Court
2 months ago

Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act Not Maintainable Against Order Under O.VII R.10 CPC: Punjab And Haryana High Court

Live Law  

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench comprising of Justice Arun Palli and Justice Vikram Aggarwal has held that an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Act read with Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is not maintainable against an order passed under Order VII Rule 10 of the CPC directing the return …

S. 16 Arbitration Act | Challenge To Arbitral Tribunal's Jurisdiction Impermissible After Submitting Statement Of Defence : Supreme Court
2 months ago

S. 16 Arbitration Act | Challenge To Arbitral Tribunal's Jurisdiction Impermissible After Submitting Statement Of Defence : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court affirmed the principle that the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal cannot be challenged after the submission of the statement of defence. A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing a case in which the respondent had objected to the jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal after submitting its statement of defence. Taking reference to …

Arbitration Act | Courts' Jurisdiction Under Sections 34 and 37 Do Not Extend To Modifying Arbitral Award: Supreme Court Reiterates
2 months ago

Arbitration Act | Courts' Jurisdiction Under Sections 34 and 37 Do Not Extend To Modifying Arbitral Award: Supreme Court Reiterates

Live Law  

Recently, the Supreme Court affirmed the principle laid down in National Highways Authority of India vs. M. Hakeem & Another that the jurisdiction of the Courts under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 will not extend to modifying an arbitral award.The bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Manoj Misra was hearing the case dealing with …

Award Passed After Inordinate And Unexplained Delay Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court
2 months, 1 week ago

Award Passed After Inordinate And Unexplained Delay Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court

Live Law  

The Madras High Court bench of Justice P.B. Balaji has held that inordinate and unexplained delay in passing the arbitral award can be a ground to set it aside under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. The court noted that in Harji Engineering Works Private Limited v. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, the Delhi High Court while referring to the UNCITRAL …

Arbitrator's Order Determining Substantive Rights Of Parties Constitutes “Award”, Amenable To Challenge U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC
2 months, 1 week ago

Arbitrator's Order Determining Substantive Rights Of Parties Constitutes “Award”, Amenable To Challenge U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court division bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur has held that orders passed by the Arbitrator during the pendency of Arbitral proceedings, which finally determines any substantive rights of the parties, constitutes an interim Arbitral Award, and can be challenged under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The court referred to …

Arbitral Award Cannot Be Challenged In Writ Petition, Party Must Use Remedy U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
2 months, 1 week ago

Arbitral Award Cannot Be Challenged In Writ Petition, Party Must Use Remedy U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that it cannot entertain a writ petition challenging an arbitral award, and the petitioner should challenge the award by taking recourse to appropriate remedies under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts: The present petition challenged an arbitral award passed pursuant to reference to arbitration under Section 18 …

Delhi High Court Reiterates Limited Scope Of Section 34 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act
2 months, 2 weeks ago

Delhi High Court Reiterates Limited Scope Of Section 34 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi pronounced a judgement in the matter of “Centre for Research Planning and Action v. National Medicinal Plants Board Ministry of AYUSH Government of India” FAO 161/2022 dated 8th January, 2025 re-iterating the limited scope of Section 34 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Respondent refused to entertain any claim when invoices were raised after March …

Commercial Court Committed Jurisdictional Error By Imposing Pre-Condition To Deposit 50% Of Amount For Stay Against Arbitral Award: Rajasthan HC
2 months, 2 weeks ago

Commercial Court Committed Jurisdictional Error By Imposing Pre-Condition To Deposit 50% Of Amount For Stay Against Arbitral Award: Rajasthan HC

Live Law  

The Rajasthan High Court Bench of Justice Sudesh Bansal has held that the Commercial Court has committed jurisdictional error in exercising its discretion arbitrarily, mechanically and injudiciously, while putting the condition to deposit 50% of the awarded amount, for operating stay against arbitral award without assigned justified and sound reasonings. Brief Facts: The present petition has been filed under Article …

Date Of Receipt Of Corrected Award Would Be Taken As Disposal Date U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act, Even When Application U/S 33 Has Been Filed: Delhi HC
2 months, 2 weeks ago

Date Of Receipt Of Corrected Award Would Be Taken As Disposal Date U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act, Even When Application U/S 33 Has Been Filed: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that taking the date of receipt of the corrected award as the starting point and not as the date of disposal would actually go contrary to the plain reading of Section 34 of the Act. However, the respondent argued that in the present case the terminus quo for calculating …

Arbitration Act 1940 | 30-Day Objection Period Starts When Objector Becomes Aware of Award, Not Upon Formal Notice : Supreme Court
Trending News
2 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Act 1940 | 30-Day Objection Period Starts When Objector Becomes Aware of Award, Not Upon Formal Notice : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court noted that under the Arbitration Act, 1940, 30-day period for filing objections begins when the objector becomes aware of the award, not upon receiving formal notice“The question for consideration is whether the time for filing a Section 17 application commences when the party seeking to challenge the award receives a formal notice of the. The Supreme Court …

Arbitration Act 1940 | 30-Day Objection Period Starts When Objector Becomes Aware of Award, Not Upon Formal Notice : Supreme Court
Trending News
2 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Act 1940 | 30-Day Objection Period Starts When Objector Becomes Aware of Award, Not Upon Formal Notice : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court noted that under the Arbitration Act, 1940, 30-day period for filing objections begins when the objector becomes aware of the award, not upon receiving formal notice“The question for consideration is whether the time for filing a Section 17 application commences when the party seeking to challenge the award receives a formal notice of the. The Supreme Court …

Award Passed On Consent Cannot Be Held To Be Patently Illegal Or Contrary To Public Policy: Himachal Pradesh HC
2 months, 3 weeks ago

Award Passed On Consent Cannot Be Held To Be Patently Illegal Or Contrary To Public Policy: Himachal Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justices Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Satyen Vaidya held that the award being primarily based on consent cannot also be held to be patently illegal or in conflict with the public policy of India. Brief Facts The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, …

Delhi HC Upholds Limited Judicial Interference In Arbitral Awards, Dismisses S.34 Plea Challenging Award Of ₹77.96 Crore In Telecom Dispute
2 months, 4 weeks ago

Delhi HC Upholds Limited Judicial Interference In Arbitral Awards, Dismisses S.34 Plea Challenging Award Of ₹77.96 Crore In Telecom Dispute

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has observed that it is no longer res integra that while dealing with the objections under Section 34, a court does not sit in appeal over the arbitral award. The court observed that under Section 35, an award can be set aside only if the petitioner establishes that the parties …

National Investigation Agency Act | High Court Can't Condone Delay In Filing Appeal Beyond 90 Days, S.21(5) Mandatory: Punjab & Haryana HC
3 months ago

National Investigation Agency Act | High Court Can't Condone Delay In Filing Appeal Beyond 90 Days, S.21(5) Mandatory: Punjab & Haryana HC

Live Law  

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the High Court is not empowered to condone delay in filing appeal under National Investigation Agency Act beyond 90 days and provision of Section 21 is "mandatory" in nature. Courts creating distinction between appellant under Section 21 of the NIA Act for condoning the delay in preferring an appeal, would absolutely …

National Investigation Agency Act | High Court Can't Condone Delay In Filing Appeal Beyond 90 Days, S.21(5) Mandatory: Punjab & Haryana HC
3 months ago

National Investigation Agency Act | High Court Can't Condone Delay In Filing Appeal Beyond 90 Days, S.21(5) Mandatory: Punjab & Haryana HC

Live Law  

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said that the High Court is not empowered to condone delay in filing appeal under National Investigation Agency Act beyond 90 days and provision of Section 21 is "mandatory" in nature. Courts creating distinction between appellant under Section 21 of the NIA Act for condoning the delay in preferring an appeal, would absolutely …

Award Is Time-Barred U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act Due To Petitioner's Failure To Confirm Award Receipt On Affidavit: Delhi High Court
3 months ago

Award Is Time-Barred U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act Due To Petitioner's Failure To Confirm Award Receipt On Affidavit: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has affirmed that in absence of any positive affirmation on affidavit from the petitioner as to when the award was received, the Court cannot accept the mere ipse dixit of the petitioner that as soon as the award was received it was filed by the petitioner. Brief Facts: The petitioner has …

Court In Exercise Of Supervisory Jurisdiction Shall Not Interfere With Arbitral Award, Limited Scope Of Interference: Rajasthan High Court
3 months ago

Court In Exercise Of Supervisory Jurisdiction Shall Not Interfere With Arbitral Award, Limited Scope Of Interference: Rajasthan High Court

Live Law  

The Rajasthan High Court Bench of Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Dr. Justice Nupur Bhati held that it is a well settled law that the interpretation of the clause of Agreement by the Arbitrator shall not be open to judicial interference unless it is demonstrated before the Court that the interpretation put by the Arbitral Tribunal was perverse. Additionally, the court …

Termination Of Mandate Of Arbitral Tribunal Results In Waste Of Time, Resources And Money, Court Allowed Petition U/S 29A (4) And (5) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
3 months ago

Termination Of Mandate Of Arbitral Tribunal Results In Waste Of Time, Resources And Money, Court Allowed Petition U/S 29A (4) And (5) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that the parties and the Arbitral Tribunal have invested a lot of time, effort and energy in the arbitral proceedings. Brief Facts: The present petition has been filed under Section 29A and of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 read with section 7 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 …

Sufficiency Of Reasons Over Number Of Days Is Considered While Determining Plea Of Condonation Of Delay U/S 37(1)(2) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC
3 months, 1 week ago

Sufficiency Of Reasons Over Number Of Days Is Considered While Determining Plea Of Condonation Of Delay U/S 37(1)(2) Of Arbitration Act: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee held that the appellant failed to demonstrate any plausible reasons for the delay caused in filing the present appeal. The appeal was also accompanied by two applications, the first seeking condonation of 670 days delay in filing the appeal and the second 591 days delay in re-filing …

S. 33 Arbitration Act | Clarification On Award Can Be Issued Even After Arbitral Tribunal Becomes Functus Officio : Supreme Court
3 months, 1 week ago

S. 33 Arbitration Act | Clarification On Award Can Be Issued Even After Arbitral Tribunal Becomes Functus Officio : Supreme Court

Live Law  

The Supreme Court observed that although the Arbitral Tribunal becomes functus officio after passing an award, it would still retain the limited jurisdiction to clarify or correct errors in an award under Section 33 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan dismissed the appeal filed against the Delhi High Court's …

Findings Of Arbitrator U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Scrutinised As If Court Is Sitting In Appeal: Chhattisgarh High Court
3 months, 1 week ago

Findings Of Arbitrator U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Scrutinised As If Court Is Sitting In Appeal: Chhattisgarh High Court

Live Law  

The Chhattisgarh High Court bench of Justices Smt. Rajani Dubey and Shri Bibhu Datta Guru has held that findings of the Arbitrator cannot be scrutinised under section 34 of the Arbitration Act as if the court is sitting in appeal. The appellant submitted that the Commercial Court ought not to have interfered with the findings of the fact with respect …

'Reasoned Order' Passed By Arbitrator/District Court Cannot Be Interfered With U/S 37 Of A&C Act: Karnataka High Court
3 months, 2 weeks ago

'Reasoned Order' Passed By Arbitrator/District Court Cannot Be Interfered With U/S 37 Of A&C Act: Karnataka High Court

Live Law  

The Karnataka High Court bench of Justice H.P. In the case, the court found that the District Court had properly considered sections 73 and 74 of the Indian Contract Act, as well as relevant provisions of the Sale of Goods Act in modifying the arbitral award. The District Court took note of section 73 and 74 as well as Sale …

Appeal Cannot Be Dismissed As Not Maintainable On Account Of Non-Payment Of Requisite Fee: Punjab and Haryana High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Appeal Cannot Be Dismissed As Not Maintainable On Account Of Non-Payment Of Requisite Fee: Punjab and Haryana High Court

Live Law  

The Punjab and Haryana High Court stated that appeal cannot be dismissed as not maintainable on account of non-payment of requisite fee. The Division Bench consisting of Justices Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Sanjay Vashisth was considering a case where the Appellate Authority dismissed the appeal as not maintainable on the ground that the assessee/petitioner had failed to pay Rs. The …

Court Not Having Jurisdiction To Entertain Application U/S 34 Cannot Go Into Merits Of Award: Himachal Pradesh High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Court Not Having Jurisdiction To Entertain Application U/S 34 Cannot Go Into Merits Of Award: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua has held that once the court comes to the conclusion that it didn't have jurisdiction to entertain the application under section 34 of the Arbitration Act, it cannot go into the merits of the case. The court in the impugned order held that as per the law laid down …

Ineligibility Of Arbitrator Cannot Be Challenged First Time Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Ineligibility Of Arbitrator Cannot Be Challenged First Time Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court

Live Law  

The Madras High Court bench of of Chief justice Mr. K.R.Shriram and Justice Senthil Kumar Ramamoorthy has held that the ineligibility of the Arbitrator cannot be challenged for the first time under section 34 of the Arbitration Act when there were enough opportunities to challenge the same in the earlier proceedings. Later when the award was against the respondents, they …

Award Suffers From Patent Illegality When Adjudication Is Done Without Giving Any Reasons: Himachal Pradesh High Court
3 months, 4 weeks ago

Award Suffers From Patent Illegality When Adjudication Is Done Without Giving Any Reasons: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Satyen Vaidya, while a Section 34 petition, has held that when an award has been found to be rendered without giving any reasoning regarding the adjudication of the disputes, the said award suffers from patent illegality apparent on the face of the award, and liable to be set aside. Firstly, the levy …

Special Treatment Cannot Be Given To Govt For Delay In Filing Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
4 months ago

Special Treatment Cannot Be Given To Govt For Delay In Filing Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Ms. Justice Rekha Palli and Mr. Justice Saurabh Banerjee has affirmed that just because the appellant is government that doesn't mean that a special treatment will be given while condoning the delay in filing the appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration Act. That In M/s Jaitely Construction Co. v. Union of India the …

Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Challenge Arbitral Award, Only To Circumvent Statutory Requirement Of S.19 Of MSMED Act: Delhi High Court
4 months ago

Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Challenge Arbitral Award, Only To Circumvent Statutory Requirement Of S.19 Of MSMED Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula, while hearing a writ petition challenging an arbitral award passed by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council, has held that invoking the writ jurisdiction to challenge an arbitral award would circumvent the statutory requirement of pre-deposit u/s 19 of the MSMED Act, and would amount to defeating the legislative intent. …

S.34 Application Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because Approach Of Court Should Be Not To Interfere With Award: Delhi High Court
4 months ago

S.34 Application Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because Approach Of Court Should Be Not To Interfere With Award: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Saurabh Banerjee have held that the Arbitral Award should not be interfered with lightly, the same does not imply that applications filed under Section 34 ought to be rejected only on the grounds that the approach of the Court should be not to interfere with the award. Additionally, the …

Petition Filed After Expiry Of Limitation Period U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Entertained Unless Sufficient Cause Is Shown: Himachal Pradesh HC
4 months ago

Petition Filed After Expiry Of Limitation Period U/S 34(3) Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Entertained Unless Sufficient Cause Is Shown: Himachal Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua has held that petition under section 34 of the Arbitration Act cannot be entertained which is filed beyond the prescribed period of 3 months under section 34 of the Act in the absence of sufficient cause being shown. Observations: The court, at the outset, noted that as per Section …

Procedural Orders Cannot Be Considered As Interim Award Or Challenged U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
4 months ago

Procedural Orders Cannot Be Considered As Interim Award Or Challenged U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that a procedural order given by an Arbitral Tribunal, such as rejecting an application seeking impleadment of a party, does not qualify as an interim award. However, that application was rejected by the Arbitral Tribunal and stated that the allegations against Rajesh Kumar Srivastava required evidence and could not …

Well Reasoned Award Cannot Be Interfered With Under Section 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
4 months ago

Well Reasoned Award Cannot Be Interfered With Under Section 37 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Vibhu Bakhru and Tara Vitasta Ganju affirmed that Courts should not customarily interfere with Arbitral Awards that are well reasoned, and contain a plausible view.Judges, by nature, may incline towards using a corrective lens, however, under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, this corrective lens is inappropriate especially under Section 37 of the …

Discover Related