Arbitral Award Passed By MSEF Council Without Deciding Issue Of Jurisdiction Liable To Be Set Aside: Orissa High Court
1 year, 3 months ago

Arbitral Award Passed By MSEF Council Without Deciding Issue Of Jurisdiction Liable To Be Set Aside: Orissa High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Orrissa held that an arbitral award passed by the MSEF Council without deciding the Section 16 application filed by the buyer challenging its jurisdiction is liable to be set aside. Contention of the Parties The appellant challenged the impugned judgment on the following grounds: The Learned District Judge went beyond the scope of his powers as outlined in Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by reevaluating the evidence and making a fresh decision on the entire dispute based on its merits, which is not permitted by law. The Learned District Judge erred in entertaining the appeal under Section 34 of the A&C Act since the Buyer failed to make the necessary deposit within the stipulated time period. Analysis by the Court The respondent also challenged the impugned judgement in the cross appeal on the following grounds: The Learned District Judge went beyond the scope of his powers as outlined in Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by reevaluating the evidence and making a fresh decision on the entire dispute based on its merits, which is not permitted by law.

Dispute Court Application Council Act Set Award Buyer Supplier Msef Council Section 34 Of Msmed Act Section 16 Msefc Fresh Adjudication Msef Learned District  application  passed  issue  council  court  set  orissa  buyer  high  deciding  liable  dispute  award  act  msefc  supplier  msef  jurisdiction  ac

History of this topic

S. 33 Arbitration Act | Clarification On Award Can Be Issued Even After Arbitral Tribunal Becomes Functus Officio : Supreme Court
6 days, 18 hours 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 …

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

MSEFC Must Decide Question On Limitation Before Adjudicating Dispute On Merits: Telangana High Court
3 weeks, 3 days ago

MSEFC Must Decide Question On Limitation Before Adjudicating Dispute On Merits: Telangana High Court

Live Law  

The Telangana High Court bench of Justice P. Sam. Koshy, while hearing a petition filed under Article 227, has held that the issues of maintainability, particularly the question of limitation, are to be decided by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council before proceeding to adjudicate the dispute on merits. Submissions: The counsel for the petitioner made the following submissions: …

Writ Jurisdiction Cannot Be Invoked To Challenge Arbitral Award, Only To Circumvent Statutory Requirement Of S.19 Of MSMED Act: Delhi High Court
3 weeks, 6 days 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. …

MSME Council Award Can Be Challenged Only U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act, Not Under Articles 226 Or 227: Orissa High Court
1 month, 1 week ago

MSME Council Award Can Be Challenged Only U/S 34 Of Arbitration Act, Not Under Articles 226 Or 227: Orissa High Court

Live Law  

The Odisha High Court bench of Chief Justice Chakradhari Sharan Singh and Justice Murahari Sri Raman has upheld that an arbitral award passed by the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council could only be challenged in accordance with Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as mandated by Section 19 of the MSMED Act. Contentions: Mr. Sudipto Sarkar, …

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

Telangana High Court Reiterates Limited Scope For Interference With Arbitral Awards U/S 34 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Telangana High Court Reiterates Limited Scope For Interference With Arbitral Awards U/S 34 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996

Live Law  

The Telangana High Court bench comprising Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice J. Sreenivas Rao has held that an interim order passed by an arbitral tribunal under section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, restraining the encashment of a bank guarantee does not warrant interference under section 34 of the Act. The validity of the award was also …

Arbitrator Nominated U/S 18(3) MSMED Act Erred In Deciding Merits After Finding Respondent Was Not MSME: Madras HC Upholds Setting Aside Of Award
1 month, 2 weeks ago

Arbitrator Nominated U/S 18(3) MSMED Act Erred In Deciding Merits After Finding Respondent Was Not MSME: Madras HC Upholds Setting Aside Of Award

Live Law  

The Madras High Coury bench of Justices R. Suresh Kumar and C. Saravanan has held that an Arbitrator ought not to decide the case on merits after coming to a conclusion that the respondent was not a Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprise and therefore not entitled to invoke the machinery under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006. …

No Reappreciation Of Evidence Permitted Under Section 34 Of Arbitration Act, Arbitrator's Views Must Be Respected: Orissa High Court
5 months, 4 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 …

NCLT Kolkata: NCLT Has No Jurisdiction To Set Aside Arbitral Award Passed During Moratorium Period U/S 14 Of IBC
7 months, 3 weeks ago

NCLT Kolkata: NCLT Has No Jurisdiction To Set Aside Arbitral Award Passed During Moratorium Period U/S 14 Of IBC

Live Law  

The National Company Law Tribunal Kolkata, comprising Smt. Bidisha Banerjee and Shri D. Arvind held that the Adjudicating Authority lacks jurisdiction to set aside an arbitral award even when the award was issued post-initiation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process and during moratorium period under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Subodh Kumar Agarwal, the Resolution Professional of …

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: 15th April to 21st April 2024
7 months, 4 weeks ago

Arbitration Weekly Round-Up: 15th April to 21st April 2024

Live Law  

High Courts Bombay High Court Can A Section 29A Application Be Filed In The Commercial Court Or Only In The High Court? An Award Issued By Unilaterally Appointed Arbitrator Can Be Contested For Invalidity Of Appointment, Even By The Appointing Party: Delhi High Court Case Title: Telecommunication Consultants India Ltd v. Shivaa Trading Citation: 2024 LiveLaw 471 The High Court …

Arbitrator Failed To Deal With Material Contentions, Arbitral Award Would Not Satisfy The Requirement Of A Reasoned Award: Delhi High Court
8 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 …

Non Filing Of Arbitral Award Along Section 34 Is A Fatal Defect, Makes Filing Non-Est: Delhi High Court Dismisses Section 34 Petition
9 months, 2 weeks 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 …

Arbitral Awards Cannot Be Modified Under Sections 34 & 37 Of Arbitration & Conciliation Act : Supreme Court
11 months, 2 weeks 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, …

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, 1 month 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 …

MSMED Act | Facilitation Council Must Adjudicate On Interest Component Itself- Cannot Delegate To Chartered Accountant: Calcutta High Court
1 year, 2 months ago

MSMED Act | Facilitation Council Must Adjudicate On Interest Component Itself- Cannot Delegate To Chartered Accountant: Calcutta High Court

Live Law  

Calcutta High Court in holding that the MSME Council could not ‘desert the task of decision making’ to a Chartered Accountant, who was not on the Council/arbitral tribunal under the MSMED Act, a single-bench of Justice Moushumi Bhattacharya observed: Section 31 of the 1996 Act requires the arbitral tribunal to give reasons upon which the award is based subject to …

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 2nd October To 8th October
1 year, 2 months ago

Arbitration Cases Weekly Round-Up: 2nd October To 8th October

Live Law  

High Courts: Calcutta High Court Party Eligible For Interim Protection U/S 9 Arbitration & Conciliation Act, Regressive To Relegate To CPC Procedure: Calcutta High Court Case: Prathyusha- AMR JV vs Orissa Steel Expressway Private Limited Citation: 2023 LiveLaw 304 The Calcutta High Court has recently allowed applications for appointment of arbitrator u/s 11 and for interim protection u/s 9 of …

Sending Scanned Copy Of A Signed Arbitral Award Through Email Constitutes A Valid Delivery Under Section 31(5) Of The A&C Act: Delhi High Court
1 year, 3 months ago

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

Live Law  

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

Supplying Copies Of Award Certified By MSME Council To The Parties, Not Fair: Himachal Pradesh High Court
1 year, 6 months ago

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

Live Law  

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

Limited Remedy Available Under S. 34 Of A&C Act Against Award Of Compensation Under NHA, Is Not A Ground To Invoke HC’s Writ Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court
1 year, 8 months ago

Limited Remedy Available Under S. 34 Of A&C Act Against Award Of Compensation Under NHA, Is Not A Ground To Invoke HC’s Writ Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that though the scope for challenging the compensation awarded by the Arbitrator to the landowners under Section 3-G of the National Highways Act, 1956 is limited to the parameters provided under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the same cannot be a ground to invoke the High Court’s writ jurisdiction under …

‘Limitation’ Doesn’t Involve Any “Basic Notions Of Morality Or Justice”, For Setting Aside Award : Bombay High Court
1 year, 11 months ago

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

Live Law  

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

Award Against Guarantor Who Is Not Member Of Multi State Co-Op Society, Without Jurisdiction: Bombay High Court
1 year, 11 months ago

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

Live Law  

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

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

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

Live Law  

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

Participation In Arbitral Proceedings, Does Not Disentitle Party To Challenge Award On Ground Of Unilateral Appointment Of Arbitrator: Bombay High Court
2 years ago

Participation In Arbitral Proceedings, Does Not Disentitle Party To Challenge Award On Ground Of Unilateral Appointment Of Arbitrator: Bombay High Court

Live Law  

The Bombay High Court has ruled that merely because a party participated in the arbitration proceedings, it is not disentitled from challenging the arbitral award on the ground that the arbitration proceedings were vitiated due to the unilateral appointment of the Arbitrator by the opposite party, falling foul of Section 12 read with the Seventh Schedule of the Arbitration and …

Time Spent On Application Under Section 8 Of A&C Act, Not Excludable For Computation Of Limitation For Counter Claim: Delhi High Court
2 years ago

Time Spent On Application Under Section 8 Of A&C Act, Not Excludable For Computation Of Limitation For Counter Claim: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that in a suit filed by a party, the time spent by the opposite party in pursuing its application under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, cannot be excluded for the purpose of computation of the limitation period for filing the counter-claims by the opposite party before the Arbitral Tribunal. Section …

Arbitral Award Directing Specific Performance Of Contract, Cannot Be Set Aside On Ground Of Inequitable Nature Of Contract: Madras High Court
2 years, 2 months ago

Arbitral Award Directing Specific Performance Of Contract, Cannot Be Set Aside On Ground Of Inequitable Nature Of Contract: Madras High Court

Live Law  

The Madras High Court has ruled that an arbitral award directing specific performance of a contract, cannot be set aside on the ground that the nature of agreement between the parties was not capable of specific enforcement. The respondents, including J. Vengatesh, submitted before the Single Judge that the sale agreement was inequitable and unfair, and that the arbitral award …

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

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

Live Law  

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

Writ Not Maintainable Against Admission Of Petition Under Section 34 Of A&C Act Without Pre-Deposit : Orissa High Court
2 years, 3 months ago

Writ Not Maintainable Against Admission Of Petition Under Section 34 Of A&C Act Without Pre-Deposit : Orissa High Court

Live Law  

The Orissa High Court has ruled that the Court cannot entertain a writ petition against an order passed by the lower court admitting the application under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to set aside the arbitral award, despite the fact that the award debtor had failed to deposit 75% of the awarded amount, as mandated by …

Arbitral Award With Contradictory Findings Is Liable To Be Set Aside: Calcutta High Court
2 years, 3 months ago

Arbitral Award With Contradictory Findings Is Liable To Be Set Aside: Calcutta High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Calcutta has held that an arbitral award wherein the arbitrator has given contradictory findings is liable to be set aside. The arbitrator has given contradictory findings regarding the issue of delay in the execution of the work as on one hand it has observed that not a single party cannot be held responsible for the delay …

Mere Erroneous Application Of Law; Award Need Not Be Set Aside: Bombay High Court
2 years, 4 months ago

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

Live Law  

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

Account Statements And IT Returns Relied On By Arbitral Tribunal, Have Evidentiary Value : Delhi High Court
2 years, 4 months ago

Account Statements And IT Returns Relied On By Arbitral Tribunal, Have Evidentiary Value : Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that the arbitral award cannot be set aside on the ground that the material relied upon by the Arbitral Tribunal does not measure up to the standards under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. The Commercial Court held that the Arbitral Tribunal had grossly erred in relying on the Income Tax Return and the bank …

Amendment To Section 34 Application Of The A&C Act Would Not Be Permissible If It Intends A New Challenge: Bombay High Court
2 years, 5 months ago

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

Live Law  

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

Party Can Raise Additional Grounds Based On The Award Passed After The Case Is Remitted To Tribunal Under Section 34(4) Of A&C Act: Delhi High Court
2 years, 6 months ago

Party Can Raise Additional Grounds Based On The Award Passed After The Case Is Remitted To Tribunal Under Section 34(4) Of A&C Act: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that an order passed by the Arbitral Tribunal, after the matter is remanded back to it by the Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is not a fresh arbitral award that can be challenged by filing a separate petition under Section 34. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application before …

Award Cannot Be Remitted To The Arbitral Tribunal Under Section 34 (4) Of The A&C Act, If No Reasons and Findings Are Recorded: Rajasthan High Court
2 years, 6 months ago

Award Cannot Be Remitted To The Arbitral Tribunal Under Section 34 (4) Of The A&C Act, If No Reasons and Findings Are Recorded: Rajasthan High Court

Live Law  

The Rajasthan High Court has ruled that the arbitral award cannot be remitted back to the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 if there are no findings recorded in the arbitral award on the contentious issues. An arbitral award was challenged by the respondent/ award debtor Ajmer Smart City Limited by filing an application …

Inordinate And Unexplained Delay In Rendering Arbitral Award Is Against Public Policy Of India: Delhi High Court
2 years, 7 months ago

Inordinate And Unexplained Delay In Rendering Arbitral Award Is Against Public Policy Of India: Delhi High Court

Live Law  

The Delhi High Court has ruled that inordinate and unexplained delay in rendering the arbitral award is in conflict with the public policy of India and is amenable to challenge under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The petitioner filed a petition under Section 34 of the A&C Act against the arbitral award before the Delhi High …

Weekly Digest Of Arbitration Cases: April 10 To April 17, 2022
2 years, 8 months ago

Weekly Digest Of Arbitration Cases: April 10 To April 17, 2022

Live Law  

Bombay High Court 1. Claims Raised Before The Arbitral Tribunal Cannot Be Rejected Even If Not Mentioned In The Notice Issued Under Section 21 Of The A&C Act: Delhi High Court Case Title: Ministry of Youth Affairs & Sports versus Agility Logistic Pvt Ltd Citation: 2022 LiveLaw 307 The Delhi High Court has ruled that it is not necessary that …

Writ Petition Is Not Maintainable To Enforce The Arbitral Award: Madras High Court
2 years, 8 months ago

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

Live Law  

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

Writ Petition Is Maintainable Against The Award Of The MSME Council Which Failed To Give A Hearing On Limitation : Orissa High Court
2 years, 8 months ago

Writ Petition Is Maintainable Against The Award Of The MSME Council Which Failed To Give A Hearing On Limitation : Orissa High Court

Live Law  

The High Court of Orissa has observed that a writ petition is maintainable against an award rendered by the MSME Council under S. 18 of the MSMED Act wherein the petitioner was not given a hearing on a material issue regarding the limitation of the substantive claims. The Single Bench of Justice Arindam Sinha has observed that in cases where …

Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside Merely On The Ground Of Erroneous Application Of Law Or Misappreciation Of Evidence : Supreme Court
2 years, 8 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 …

Blanket Forbearance From Modifying An Arbitral Award – How Far Justiciable?
2 years, 8 months ago

Blanket Forbearance From Modifying An Arbitral Award – How Far Justiciable?

Live Law  

Non-interference of courts, except to the extent of supervision, is the spinal cord of arbitration legislations across the jurisdictions. In M. Hakeem, the Court has settled that at the stage of the challenge of an arbitral award i.e., an application under section 34 of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the court can either set aside the arbitral award …

Order XXIII Rule 1(4) CPC Not Applicable To Application Challenging Arbitral Award U/S 34 Arbitration & Conciliation Act: Patna High Court
2 years, 10 months ago

Order XXIII Rule 1(4) CPC Not Applicable To Application Challenging Arbitral Award U/S 34 Arbitration & Conciliation Act: Patna High Court

Live Law  

The Patna High Court has held that an application filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 challenging an arbitral award is not a suit. Justice Anil Kumar Sinha rejected the petitioner's argument that liberty to file a fresh application was not sought by the Respondent while withdrawing its earlier application, and observed, "As per Section 19 …

Discover Related