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 to the occurring of cause of action recorded by the Sole Arbitrator and that Section 34 of the Act, 1996, provides limited scope of review of Arbitral Award by the Court and the Court cannot interfere on its merits. After pursuing the findings of the sole arbitrator and the impugned order, the court observed that while exercising the power under Section 34 of the Act, 1996 the learned Commercial Court has not tested the finding of the arbitral award properly on the point of limitation and reversed the finding of Sole Arbitrator without assigning proper reason. The court further observed that “the act of the Commercial Court in scrutinizing the finding of fact by the Sole Arbitrator on evidence is contrary to the well settled proposition of law as laid down by the Supreme Court in the matter of Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited v Datar Swithgear Limited and Others, 2018 wherein it has been held that the Arbitral Tribunal is the master of evidence and the findings of fact which are arrived at by the arbitrators on the basis of evidence on record are not to be scrutinized, as if the Court was sitting in appeal.

High Court Limitation Held Act Claim Award Arbitrator Arbitral Sole Arbitrator Sole Section 34 Commercial Court Claimant Secl  appeal  arbitrator  claimant  claim  scrutinised  act  limitation  held  award  sole  chhattisgarh  arbitral  findings  sitting  high  court  arbitration

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
4 days, 2 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, 2 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, 3 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, 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 …

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, 3 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 …

Veracity Of Allegations Against Settlement Agreement Cannot Be Looked Into By Court In Application U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
2 weeks, 1 day ago

Veracity Of Allegations Against Settlement Agreement Cannot Be Looked Into By Court In Application U/S 11 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri has reiterated that the scope of inquiry under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is limited to examining the prima facie existence of the arbitration agreement. It was further observed that if either party contests a prior settlement agreement, then such allegations cannot be looked into by …

Anti-Arbitration Suit Giving Short-Shrift To Sec 16 A&C Act Is Hit By Order 7 Rule 11(d) Of CPC: Telangana High Court Reiterates
2 weeks, 3 days ago

Anti-Arbitration Suit Giving Short-Shrift To Sec 16 A&C Act Is Hit By Order 7 Rule 11(d) Of CPC: Telangana High Court Reiterates

Live Law  

The Telangana High Court has reiterated and clarified that suits initiated before Civil Courts to curb arbitration proceedings ignore section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996, and deserve to be rejected under Order 7, Rule 11 as being barred by statute. The appellant herein filed an injunction suit before the trial court seeking to stop the Arbitration proceeding initiated …

Arbitration Clause Cannot Be Invoked Again Over Matters Which Have Already Been Adjudicated: Karnataka High Court
2 weeks, 6 days 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 …

Supreme Court Annual Digest 2024 [Arbitration And Conciliation Act]
3 weeks, 5 days ago

Supreme Court Annual Digest 2024 [Arbitration And Conciliation Act]

Live Law  

Section 33 - 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. Ltd. v. Kamarajar Port Ltd, 2024 LiveLaw 852 Section 11 - Arbitration Clause in Public Premises Disputes – Applicability of the Public Premises Act, 1971 vis-à-vis the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, …

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 …

Named Arbitrator Cannot Be Replaced Unless There Is Evidence Of Partiality Or Bias Against Them: Andhra Pradesh HC
1 month ago

Named Arbitrator Cannot Be Replaced Unless There Is Evidence Of Partiality Or Bias Against Them: Andhra Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Andhra Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Dhiraj Singh Thakur has held that the request for seeking appointment of an independent arbitrator other than the named arbitrator cannot be entertained if there is no evidence to show that the named arbitrator would act in a partial or biased manner. ' The Supreme Court in Indian Oil Corporation Limited and …

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up [10th February-16th February]
1 month, 1 week ago

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up [10th February-16th February]

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Title: AC CHOKSHI SHARE BROKER PRIVATE LIMITED VERSUS JATIN PRATAP DESAI & ANR. Jal Nigam And Another vs. Spml Infra Ltd. : 2025:AHC:20224 The Allahabad High Court bench of Justice Piyush Agrawal, placing reliance upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in Board of Control for Cricket in India vs. Kochi Cricket Private Limited & Others, held …

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 …

Limitation For Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act Is Governed By Article 116 Of Limitation Act, Delay Not To Be Condoned In Mechanical Manner: Bombay HC
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Limitation For Appeal U/S 37 Of Arbitration Act Is Governed By Article 116 Of Limitation Act, Delay Not To Be Condoned In Mechanical Manner: Bombay HC

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has held that the delay in filing an appeal under section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 should not be condoned in a mechanical manner as it would defeat the very objective of the Arbitration Act which is to provide a speedy resolution of disputes. It also held that as …

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 …

No Bar On Court To Entertain More Than One Application U/S 29A Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

No Bar On Court To Entertain More Than One Application U/S 29A Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court

Live Law  

The Madras High Court bench of Justice Abdul Quddhose has held that there is no prohibition for the Court to entertain more than one application under Section 29A of the Act seeking extension of time for the arbitrator to pronounce arbitral award provided sufficient cause is demonstrated. Brief Facts: The present application has been filed under section 29A of the …

Award Passed By Improperly Appointed Arbitrator Is Non-Est In Law And Invalid: Delhi High Court
Trending News
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Award Passed By Improperly Appointed Arbitrator Is Non-Est In Law And Invalid: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh has held that it is settled law that the Arbitrator is a creature of the contract and has to function within four corners of contract. As per the Arbitration Clause, the General Manager/Business Unit Head was the named Arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes between the parties. However, the respondent on 20.12.2010 …

Construction Of Terms Of Contract Must Be Primarily Decided By Arbitrator, Not Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Construction Of Terms Of Contract Must Be Primarily Decided By Arbitrator, Not Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma has held that Construction of the terms of the contract is primarily for the arbitrator to decide, unless it is found that such a construction is not at all possible. It is the case of the petitioner that the Supreme Court in 'ONGC v. Afcons Gunanusa JV' held that unilateral …

[A&C Act] Non-Payment Of Part Of Mutually Agreed Amount After Settlement Of Dispute Not An Arbitrable Issue Under Arbitration Agreement: Andhra Pradesh HC
1 month, 3 weeks ago

[A&C Act] Non-Payment Of Part Of Mutually Agreed Amount After Settlement Of Dispute Not An Arbitrable Issue Under Arbitration Agreement: Andhra Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Andhra Pradesh High Court has upheld the dismissal of an application filed under section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, holding that once an amount has been mutually decided by the parties, the dispute itself is resolved and no arbitrable issue remains for consideration. A Division Bench of Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari and Justice V. Srinivas pointed out …

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 …

Appeal In Commercial Dispute Arising From Arbitration Act Must Be Filed Before Commercial Appellate Court, Not HC: Orissa High Court
1 month, 4 weeks ago

Appeal In Commercial Dispute Arising From Arbitration Act Must Be Filed Before Commercial Appellate Court, Not HC: Orissa High Court

Live Law  

The Orissa High Court bench of Justice S.K. Panigrahi has held that a plain reading of Sections 6 and 10 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, leads to the conclusion that the appropriate 'court' to consider a commercial dispute, even if it arises under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, would be the commercial court and an appeal would, therefore, lie …

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up [20th January-26th January 2025]
1 month, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up [20th January-26th January 2025]

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Detail : M/S R.S. High Courts Bombay High Court Case Title: Health Care, Medical & General Stores Versus Amulya Investment,Through Proprietor Mr. Sameer G. Narvekar Citation: 2025 LiveLaw 23 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 …

[S.16 Arbitration Act] Jurisdiction Of Tribunal Cannot Be Challenged After Submission Of Defence: Allahabad High Court
2 months ago

[S.16 Arbitration Act] Jurisdiction Of Tribunal Cannot Be Challenged After Submission Of Defence: Allahabad High Court

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court has held that as per Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the jurisdiction of an arbitral tribunal cannot be challenged after submission of defence and that the arbitral tribunal is empowered to adjudicate on its own jurisdiction. The bench of Justice Siddhartha Varma and Dr. Justice Yogendra Kumar Srivastava held “Section 16 of …

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 …

Double Payment For Same Claim Violates Public Policy U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Karnataka High Court
2 months ago

Double Payment For Same Claim Violates Public Policy U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Karnataka High Court

Live Law  

The Karnataka High Court Bench of Chief Justice N. V. Anjaria and Justice K. V. Aravind held that the issue of double payment for the same claim would undoubtedly be in direct conflict with the Public Policy of India and would violate the Fundamental Policy of Indian Law, as well as the basic principles of morality and justice. Additionally, the …

Court Cannot Assume Jurisdiction To Appoint Arbitrator Unless Request For Reference Of Dispute Is Received By Respondent: Bombay High Court
2 months ago

Court Cannot Assume Jurisdiction To Appoint Arbitrator Unless Request For Reference Of Dispute Is Received By Respondent: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice R. M. Joshi has held that compliance with Section 21 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is mandatory and that the court cannot assume jurisdiction to appoint an Arbitrator under Section 11 unless a request for a reference of dispute is received by the respondent. The present application was filed under Section …

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 …

Can Arbitral Awards Be Modified Under S. 34 & S.37 Of Arbitration Act? Supreme Court Refers To 5 Judge Bench
Trending News
2 months ago

Can Arbitral Awards Be Modified Under S. 34 & S.37 Of Arbitration Act? Supreme Court Refers To 5 Judge Bench

Live Law  

The Supreme Court today referred to a 5 judge constitution bench the issue of whether Courts have the power to modify an arbitral award under S. 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Viswanathan, and Sandeep Mehta referred to the larger bench the question of whether the courts have the power to modify the arbitral award under …

Violation Of Provisions Of Arbitration Act Or MSMED Act Can Be Adjudicated By Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Orissa High Court
2 months ago

Violation Of Provisions Of Arbitration Act Or MSMED Act Can Be Adjudicated By Court U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Orissa High Court

Live Law  

An Orissa High Court bench of Justice K.R. Mohapatra has dismissed a writ petition upon holding that the petitioner, without availing the efficacious statutory remedy u/s 34 of the Arbitration Act had approached the Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution for which the Court was not inclined to exercise its discretionary power to entertain it. Additionally, the …

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 …

MSMED Act | Is Writ Maintainable Against MSEFC Award? Can MSEFC Members Act As Arbitrators ? Supreme Court Refers To Larger Bench
Trending News
2 months ago

MSMED Act | Is Writ Maintainable Against MSEFC Award? Can MSEFC Members Act As Arbitrators ? Supreme Court Refers To Larger Bench

Live Law  

The Supreme Court today opined that the party aggrieved by an order/award of the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council passed under Section 18 of the Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 can file a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court. However, upon noting that a contrary view was expressed in the …

Additional Evidence Can Only Be Allowed In Exceptional Circumstances While Deciding Plea U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Chhattisgarh HC
2 months ago

Additional Evidence Can Only Be Allowed In Exceptional Circumstances While Deciding Plea U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Chhattisgarh HC

Live Law  

The Chhattisgarh High Court bench of Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey has held that additional evidence not forming part of the arbitral record can be allowed to be given only in exceptional circumstances while hearing a petition under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts: The petitioner challenges an order passed by the commercial court by which an application under …

Concept Of Appointing Named Arbitrator Who Is An Interested Party Is No Longer Sustainable: Uttarakhand High Court
2 months ago

Concept Of Appointing Named Arbitrator Who Is An Interested Party Is No Longer Sustainable: Uttarakhand High Court

Live Law  

The Uttarakhand High Court bench of Chief Justice G. Narendar has held that the concept of appointing a named Arbitrator, who himself is an interested party, is no longer sustainable. The main issue was whether the applicants are entitled to appointment of an Arbitrator dehors the stipulation in Clause 28.0, wherein it had been agreed that the Principal Secretary/Secretary, Department …

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 …

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: [13th January-19th January 2025]
2 months, 1 week ago

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: [13th January-19th January 2025]

Live Law  

High Courts Calcutta High Court Case Title: Smt. The court also noted that clause 3 of the contract allowed the forfeiture of security deposit only when the contract was rescinded but in the present case there was no material on record indicating that the contract was rescinded Delhi High Court Case Title: Center For Research Planning And Action v. National …

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 …

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 …

Expert Tribunal's Award Did Not Suffer From Patent Illegality, Cannot Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
2 months, 1 week ago

Expert Tribunal's Award Did Not Suffer From Patent Illegality, Cannot Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Dharmesh Sharma has held that the scope of interference by the Court with the arbitral award under Section 34 is very limited, and the Court is not supposed to travel beyond the aforesaid scope to determine whether the award is good or bad. In the present case, the court …

Delhi High Court Reiterates Limited Scope Of Section 34 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act
2 months, 1 week 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 …

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 …

Substantive Objections On Validity Or Existence Of Arbitration Agreement Can Be Adjudicated By Tribunal U/S 16 Of Act: Bombay HC
2 months, 2 weeks ago

Substantive Objections On Validity Or Existence Of Arbitration Agreement Can Be Adjudicated By Tribunal U/S 16 Of Act: Bombay HC

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court bench of Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan has held that substantive objections concerning the validity and existence of an arbitration agreement can be adjudicated by the Arbitral Tribunal and not by the court under section 11 of the Arbitration Act. In doing so, the Arbitral Tribunal may also rule on any objections with respect to the existence or …

High Court Which Appointed Arbitrator U/S 11(6) Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Classified As “Court” U/S 42: Himachal Pradesh HC
2 months, 3 weeks ago

High Court Which Appointed Arbitrator U/S 11(6) Of Arbitration Act Cannot Be Classified As “Court” U/S 42: Himachal Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Himachal High Court bench of Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua has held that the High Court which exercises original civil jurisdiction cannot be classified as 'Court' for the purpose of Section 42 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act when it merely appointed arbitrators under Section 11 of the Act. Section 42 of the Act will not be attracted where …

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, …

Arbitration Cases Annual Digest 2024
2 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Cases Annual Digest 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea Challenging Validity Of Section 3G Of National Highways Act Case Title: B.D. High Court Not Having Original Civil Jurisdiction Cannot Extend Time To Pass Arbitral Award As Per S.29A Arbitration Act : Supreme Court Case Title: CHIEF ENGINEER PWD VERSUS M/S BSC & C and C JV Citation : 2024 LiveLaw 425 …

Arbitration Cases Quarterly Digest: October To December 2024
Trending News
2 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Cases Quarterly Digest: October To December 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Title: R.P. Agreement Between Parties Must Be Given Primacy When Deciding Petition U/S 9 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court Case Title: M/S INNOVATIVE FACILITY SOLUTIONS PVT LTD v. M/S AFFORDABLE INFRASTRUCTURE Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 1192 The Delhi High Court Bench of Mr. Justice Jasmeet Singh held that the role of the court under section 9 of …

Monthly Digest Of Arbitration Cases: December 2024
2 months, 4 weeks ago

Monthly Digest Of Arbitration Cases: December 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case : Kirpal Singh Vs Government Of India Citation : 2024 LiveLaw 970 The Supreme Court has held that Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963 is applicable to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Case Title: M/S GRANDSLAM DEVELOPERS PVT LTD v. AKSHAY GANDHI PROPRIETOR OF PRAXIS DESIGN SOLUTIONS Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 1351 The Delhi High Court …

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 …

Discover Related