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 section 65 of the Indian Evidence Act was allowed. Based on this, it was argued that challenge under section 34 of the Arbitration Act must rely solely on the arbitral record and additional documents should be allowed only in exceptional circumstances. It was held that “an application for setting aside the arbitral award will not ordinarily require anything beyond the record that was before the arbitrator, however, if there are matters not containing such records and the relevant determination to the issues arising under section 34, they may be brought to the notice of the Court by way of affidavits filed by both the parties' the cross-examination of the persons swearing in to the affidavits should not be allowed unless absolutely necessary as the truth will emerge on the reading of the affidavits filed by both the parties.” While relying on the observations, the court observed that no affidavit demonstrating the exceptional circumstances was filed along with the application under section 65 of the Evidence Act therefore in such circumstances the application under section 65 was not maintainable.

Arbitration Evidence Court Exceptional Circumstances Application Act Allowed Section 34 Of Section 65 Section 65 Of  34  evidence  circumstances  65  deciding  hc  respondent  allowed  act  record  additional  plea  court  filed  application  chhattisgarh  exceptional  arbitration

History of this topic

Arbitral Tribunal Is Sole Judge Of Evidence, Court Not Required To Re-Evaluate Evidence U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
6 days, 8 hours 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
6 days, 9 hours 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
6 days, 12 hours 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
1 week, 4 days 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 …

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 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 …

No Bar On Court To Entertain More Than One Application U/S 29A Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court
1 month, 2 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 …

Supreme Court Reiterates Narrow Scope Of Interference Under Section 37 Arbitration Act
1 month, 2 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 …

[S.16 Arbitration Act] Jurisdiction Of Tribunal Cannot Be Challenged After Submission Of Defence: Allahabad High Court
1 month, 3 weeks 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
1 month, 3 weeks 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 …

[Arbitration Act] Application U/S 34 Without Award Copy Or Vakalatnama Is Merely A 'Stack Of Papers' Filed To Save Limitation: Delhi HC
1 month, 3 weeks ago

[Arbitration Act] Application U/S 34 Without Award Copy Or Vakalatnama Is Merely A 'Stack Of Papers' Filed To Save Limitation: Delhi HC

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Subramonium Prasad has held that a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, filed without the award itself, would not be a valid filing. An application under Section 34 of the Act, filed without an award and admittedly without a vakalatmana, can only be a stack of papers filed only to save …

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 …

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, 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 …

Delhi HC Upholds Limited Judicial Interference In Arbitral Awards, Dismisses S.34 Plea Challenging Award Of ₹77.96 Crore In Telecom Dispute
2 months, 3 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 …

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 …

[Arbitration Act] S.2(1)(f) Is Non-Derogable, Applicability Cannot Be Excluded Even By Mutual Consent Of Parties: Delhi High Court
3 months, 2 weeks ago

[Arbitration Act] S.2(1)(f) Is Non-Derogable, Applicability Cannot Be Excluded Even By Mutual Consent Of Parties: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Neena Bansal Krishna has held that section 2 of the Arbitration Act which defined the International Commercial Arbitration is a non derogable provision and its applicability cannot be excluded even by mutual consent of the parties. However, certain Sections of the Act, like S.2 which is the definition section, form the basic structure …

Ineligibility Of Arbitrator Cannot Be Challenged First Time Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act: Madras High Court
3 months, 2 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 …

Delhi HC Allows Invocation Of Arbitration Clause After 10 Yrs, Says That Scope Of S.11(6) Plea Is Limited To Ascertaining Existence Of Agreement
Trending News
3 months, 3 weeks ago

Delhi HC Allows Invocation Of Arbitration Clause After 10 Yrs, Says That Scope Of S.11(6) Plea Is Limited To Ascertaining Existence Of Agreement

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court Bench of Justice Sachin Datta has held that the scope of the present proceedings is confined to ascertaining the existence of the arbitration agreement. Observation of the court: The court held that the scope of the present proceedings is confined to ascertaining the existence of the arbitration agreement. Then, the court held that since the existence …

Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Challenge Arbitral Award, Only To Circumvent Statutory Requirement Of S.19 Of MSMED Act: Delhi High Court
3 months, 3 weeks 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. …

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
3 months, 3 weeks 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 …

Himachal Pradesh High Court Reiterates Limited Scope Of Court Intervention U/S 34 & 37 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act
4 months ago

Himachal Pradesh High Court Reiterates Limited Scope Of Court Intervention U/S 34 & 37 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Virender Singh has reiterated that the scope of interference with arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is narrow and not akin to appellate jurisdiction. Brief Facts: The Government of India, by a notification under Section 3 of the National Highways Act, 1956, acquired land …

Whether Claim Is Barred By Res Judicata Cannot Be Decided By Court At S.11 Stage Of Arbitration Act: P&H High Court
4 months ago

Whether Claim Is Barred By Res Judicata Cannot Be Decided By Court At S.11 Stage Of Arbitration Act: P&H High Court

Live Law  

The Punjab and Haryana High Court bench of Justice Survir Sehgal affirmed that the question whether a claim is barred by res judicata, does not arise for consideration in a proceedings under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act. That the petitioner had two remedies and having chosen to avail the remedy under Real Estate Act, 1996, he was debarred from …

Award Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act If Arbitrator Travels Beyond Arbitration Agreement: Madhya Pradesh HC
Trending News
4 months, 1 week ago

Award Can Be Set Aside U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act If Arbitrator Travels Beyond Arbitration Agreement: Madhya Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar affirmed that if arbitrator travels beyond the terms of the arbitration agreement while passing an award, such an award is liable to be set aside under section 34 of the Arbitration Act. Brief Facts This Arbitration Appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been filed …

De-Jure Ineligibility To Act As Arbitrator U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act Can Be Waived Only By Express Agreement In Writing: Delhi High Court
Trending News
4 months, 1 week ago

De-Jure Ineligibility To Act As Arbitrator U/S 12(5) Of Arbitration Act Can Be Waived Only By Express Agreement In Writing: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justice Sachin Datta affirmed that de jure ineligibility to act as an arbitrator can only be waived, after dispute having arisen, by the parties by an express agreement in writing under proviso to section 12 of the Arbitration Act. The court referred to the Delhi High Court judgment in Reliance Infrastructure Limited v. Madhyanchal …

Scope Of Review U/S 37 Is Limited To Ascertaining Compliance With S. 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court
4 months, 1 week ago

Scope Of Review U/S 37 Is Limited To Ascertaining Compliance With S. 34 Of Arbitration Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court bench of Justices Rekha Palli and Saurabh Banerjee affirmed that the Court under section 37 of the Arbitration Act cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award, and must only ascertain that the exercise of power by the Court under Section 34 has not exceeded the scope of the provision Brief Facts The …

Plea Of Limitation Shall Be Deemed To Be Waived If Not Raised Before Arbitrator U/S 16 Of Arbitration Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court
4 months, 1 week ago

Plea Of Limitation Shall Be Deemed To Be Waived If Not Raised Before Arbitrator U/S 16 Of Arbitration Act: Madhya Pradesh High Court

Live Law  

The Madhya Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar affirmed that plea of limitation cannot be allowed to be raised first time under section 34 of the Arbitration Act if no such plea was taken before the Arbitrator under section 16 of the Act. Brief Facts This arbitration appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 …

Arbitration Monthly Digest: October 2024
4 months, 1 week ago

Arbitration Monthly Digest: October 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Title: R.P. Case Title: LAVA INTERNATIONAL LIMITED Vs MINTELLECTUALS LLP Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 1114 The Delhi High Court bench comprising Justice Prateek Jalan has held that in orders passed by the arbitral tribunal under Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court is not bound by the principles underlying Order XXXVIII and XXXIX of …

Objection To Tribunal's Jurisdiction U/S 16 Of Arbitration Act Must Be Raised Before Or At Time Of Statement Of Defence: Himachal Pradesh HC
4 months, 2 weeks ago

Objection To Tribunal's Jurisdiction U/S 16 Of Arbitration Act Must Be Raised Before Or At Time Of Statement Of Defence: Himachal Pradesh HC

Live Law  

The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua affirmed that a party is bound by virtue of Section 16 of the Arbitration Act to raise any objection it may have to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal before or at the time of submission of its statement of defence, and at any time thereafter it is expressly prohibited. …

Arbitration Cases Monthly Digest: September 2024
5 months, 2 weeks ago

Arbitration Cases Monthly Digest: September 2024

Live Law  

Supreme Court Case Title: COX & KINGS LTD. Delhi High Court Case Title: Apex Buildsys Ltd. Vs Vadera Interiors And Exteriors and connected matter Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 956 The Delhi High Court bench of Justice C. Hari Shankar has held that objections related to the legality of an arbitrator's appointment cannot be raised in a petition seeking an extension of …

Arbitration | Referral Courts Must Not Conduct Intricate Enquiry On Whether Claims Are Time-Barred : Supreme Court Clarifies 'Arif Azim' Judgment
8 months ago

Arbitration | Referral Courts Must Not Conduct Intricate Enquiry On Whether Claims Are Time-Barred : Supreme Court Clarifies 'Arif Azim' Judgment

Live Law  

The Supreme Court held that while deciding a Section 11 petition for an appointment of an arbitrator, the referral courts must not conduct an intricate evidentiary enquiry into the question of whether the claims raised by the applicant are time-barred and should leave that question for determination by the arbitrator. The bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala …

Arbitration Weekly Roundup: June 24 - June 30, 2024
8 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Weekly Roundup: June 24 - June 30, 2024

Live Law  

Delhi High Court Objections Regarding Time-Barred Claims Under Section 11 Petition Should Be Left For Arbitral Tribunal: Delhi High Court Case Title: Capri Global Capital Limited Vs Ms Kiran Case Number: ARB.P. Orrisa High Court No Reappreciation Of Evidence Permitted Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act, Arbitrator's Views Must Be Respected: Orissa High Court Case Title: Principal Secretary to the …

No Reappreciation Of Evidence Permitted Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act, Arbitrator's Views Must Be Respected: Orissa High Court
8 months, 3 weeks ago

No Reappreciation Of Evidence Permitted Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act, Arbitrator's Views Must Be Respected: Orissa High Court

Live Law  

The Orrisa High Court bench of Justice D. Dash held that in a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, reappreciating evidence is not allowed in order to replace the arbitrator's view with another. Observations by the High Court: The High Court referred to Section 37 of the Arbitration Act which states that an appeal can …

Arbitration Act | Once Party Aware Of Contents Of Award, Can't Claim Extension Of Limitation By Invoking S.31(5): Allahabad High Court
9 months, 3 weeks ago

Arbitration Act | Once Party Aware Of Contents Of Award, Can't Claim Extension Of Limitation By Invoking S.31(5): Allahabad High Court

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court has held that the requirement of signed copy of award being delivered to parties under Section 31 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 is not to be construed narrowly. The Court held that once the party seeking extension of limitation by applying Section 31 of the Act is aware of the contents of the alleged …

S.5 Limitation Act Does Not Apply To Application U/S 34 Arbitration Act, Timeline Provided To Be Adhered Strictly: Allahabad High Court
10 months ago

S.5 Limitation Act Does Not Apply To Application U/S 34 Arbitration Act, Timeline Provided To Be Adhered Strictly: Allahabad High Court

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court has held that Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to proceedings under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the timeline provided in Section 34 for challenging an arbitral award must be strictly adhered to. Proviso to Section 34 empowers Court to condone a delay of 30 days if sufficient …

Arbitral Tribunal Cant Go Outside Reference Order, Cannot Widen Its Jurisdiction By Dealing With Disputes Not Referred To It: Punjab And Haryana High Court
10 months, 2 weeks ago

Arbitral Tribunal Cant Go Outside Reference Order, Cannot Widen Its Jurisdiction By Dealing With Disputes Not Referred To It: Punjab And Haryana High Court

Live Law  

The Punjab and Haryana High Court single bench of Justice Suvir Sehgal held that an Arbitral Tribunal cannot go outside the reference order by the Punjab State Electricity Regulatory Commission under Section 86 of the Electricity Act, 2003 and cannot widen its jurisdiction by dealing with disputes not referred to it. Observations by the High Court: The High Court noted …

Arbitrator Failed To Deal With Material Contentions, Arbitral Award Would Not Satisfy The Requirement Of A Reasoned Award: Delhi High Court
11 months ago

Arbitrator Failed To Deal With Material Contentions, Arbitral Award Would Not Satisfy The Requirement Of A Reasoned Award: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi has held that when the arbitral tribunal fails to deal with submissions of a party on a contentious issue, the resultant award would not fulfil the requirements of a reasoned award as required under Section 31 of the A&C Act. It held that the tribunal cannot simply accept unquantified claims without assigning reasons and without …

No Writ Against Order Of Tribunal Rejecting Application U/S 16 Of The A&C Act Unless It Shocks The Conscience Of The Court: Delhi High Court
11 months, 3 weeks ago

No Writ Against Order Of Tribunal Rejecting Application U/S 16 Of The A&C Act Unless It Shocks The Conscience Of The Court: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi has held that an order of the arbitral tribunal rejecting an application challenging its jurisdiction under Section 16 of the A&C Act cannot be challenged in a writ petition unless the order is so perverse that it shocks the conscience of the Court. During pendency of the arbitration proceedings, the petitioner moved an application under …

O.47 R.27 CPC | While Court Can't Usually Record Additional Evidence At Appellate Stage, Ceratin Exceptions Are Carved Out For Doing So: J&K High Court
1 year ago

O.47 R.27 CPC | While Court Can't Usually Record Additional Evidence At Appellate Stage, Ceratin Exceptions Are Carved Out For Doing So: J&K High Court

Live Law  

The Jammu and Kashmir & Ladakh High Court has said that ordinarily the parties to an appeal shall not be entitled to produce additional evidence, whether oral or documentary, in the appellate court. However clarifying the circumstances under which an appellate court can allow parties to introduce new evidence during an appeal Justice Javed Iqbal Wani observed, “Normally an appellate …

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 …

Even If Arbitral Award Set Aside For Non-Compliance With Section 12, Parties Can File Fresh Section 11 Application For Arbitrator Appointment: Delhi High Court
1 year ago

Even If Arbitral Award Set Aside For Non-Compliance With Section 12, Parties Can File Fresh Section 11 Application For Arbitrator Appointment: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench of Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma held that mere invalidation or unenforceability of the arbitrator appointment process does not render the entire arbitration clause void. The bench held that even if an arbitration award is set aside due to unilateral appointment and non-compliance with Section 12 of the Arbitration Act, fundamental agreement between the parties …

Arbitral Award With Internal Contradictions Is Perverse And Patently Illegal; Delhi High Court allows Section 34 Petition
1 year, 1 month ago

Arbitral Award With Internal Contradictions Is Perverse And Patently Illegal; Delhi High Court allows Section 34 Petition

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court single bench comprising Justice Sachin Datta held that an award suffering from internal contradictions is considered perverse and patently illegal under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Petitioner challenged the arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in the Delhi High Court. The Petitioner challenged the impugned …

Arbitration Weekly Round Up: 3nd February to 11th February 2024
1 year, 1 month ago

Arbitration Weekly Round Up: 3nd February to 11th February 2024

Live Law  

Delhi High Court Delhi High Court Dismisses Writ Petition, Permits Petitioner To Avail Remedy Under S. 37 Of Arbitration Act Case Title: Shri Balaji Enterprises & Ors vs Reserve Bank Of India & Anr. Need For Broad Panel To Choose From To Ensure Arbitrator's Independence As Per Clause 64 of GCC: Delhi High Court Case Title: The Braithwaite Burn and …

Arbitration Act| Debatable Questions Of Fact Cannot Be Decided In Proceedings U/ S 11(6): Allahabad High Court
1 year, 1 month ago

Arbitration Act| Debatable Questions Of Fact Cannot Be Decided In Proceedings U/ S 11(6): Allahabad High Court

Live Law  

The Allahabad High Court has reiterated that the scope of judicial review in proceedings under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is very narrow. “In the said judgment, it has been observed that while deciding issue of arbitrability, the Court under Section 11 has a very limited power, confined to cases where there is not even a …

Arbitral Award Can't Be Challenged On Ground Of Bias Of Arbitrator If No Challenge Was Made During Arbitral Proceedings: Delhi High Court
1 year, 2 months ago

Arbitral Award Can't Be Challenged On Ground Of Bias Of Arbitrator If No Challenge Was Made During Arbitral Proceedings: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Delhi has held that an arbitral award cannot be challenged on the ground of bias of arbitrator if no challenge to bias was made during the pendency of arbitral proceedings. The bench of Justice Pratibha M. Singh held that a party that has fully participated in the arbitral proceedings without raising any challenge to the jurisdiction …

Arbitral Awards Cannot Be Modified Under Sections 34 & 37 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act : Supreme Court
1 year, 2 months ago

Arbitral Awards Cannot Be Modified Under Sections 34 & 37 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act : Supreme Court

Live Law  

While deciding on a plea whether there is a scope of interference with arbitral awards under Section 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the Supreme Court has reiterated the settled position of law that any attempt to “modify an award” while adjudicating Sections 34 and 37 petitions is not permissible under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, …

Court U/S 37 Of The A&C Act Can’t Undertake An Independent Assessment Of Arbitral Award,: Bombay High Court
1 year, 3 months ago

Court U/S 37 Of The A&C Act Can’t Undertake An Independent Assessment Of Arbitral Award,: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Bombay has held that under Section 37 of the A&C Act, the challenge must be related to the impugned order passed under Section 34 of the Act and not merely to the arbitral award. S. Doctor held that the Court while exercising powers under Section 37 of the A&C Act cannot take an independent assessment of …

Issue Of Non-Stamping Of Arbitration Agreement Not Raised Before The Arbitrator, Cannot Be Raised Subsequently Under Section 34 Or 37 Of The A&C Act: Bombay High Court
1 year, 4 months ago

Issue Of Non-Stamping Of Arbitration Agreement Not Raised Before The Arbitrator, Cannot Be Raised Subsequently Under Section 34 Or 37 Of The A&C Act: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Bombay has held that if the issue of non-stamping or insufficient stamping of the arbitration agreement is not raised before the arbitrator or on the first possible opportunity, then it cannot be raised subsequently under Section 34 or 37 of the A&C Act. The Court held that an appeal to challenge an arbitral award cannot be …

Discover Related