PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, PANKAJ MITHAL
Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Limited – Appellant
Versus
Sanman Rice Mills – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
PANKAJ MITHAL, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The challenge in this Civil Appeal is to the judgment and order dated 10.01.2017 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in exercise of powers under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19961[hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’] setting aside the order dated 07.04.2015 passed under Section 34 of the Act and also the arbitral order dated 08.11.2012.
FACTS:
3. The appellant - Punjab State Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. 2[hereinafter referred to as ‘the Corporation’] entered into an agreement dated 06.10.2008 with M/s Sanman Rice Mills3[hereinafter referred to as ‘the Rice Mill’] whereunder the Corporation was to supply paddy to the Rice Mill for the purpose of milling that had to supply back the resultant rice to the Corporation.
4. A total of 2,02,850 bags of Grade ‘A’ variety of paddy weighing 70,997.50 quintals was supplied by the Corporation to the Rice Mill. However, after processing, the Rice Mill resupplied only a part of the same with a shortfall of 35110.39 quintals of rice. Thus, this shortage in quantity of rice equivalent to a total cost of Rs.7,16,15,716/- was recoverable from the Rice Mill.
Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. v. L.K.Ahuja
Dyna Technology Private Limited v. Crompton Greaves Limited
Konkan Railway Corporation Limited v. Chenab Bridge Project Undertaking
Bombay Slum Redevelopment Corporation Private Limited v. Samir Narain Bhojwani
Appeal against arbitral award – Courts should not interfere with arbitral award lightly in a casual and a cavalier manner--Mere possibility of an alternative view on facts or interpretation of contra....
The court emphasized that judicial interference with arbitral awards is strictly limited, focusing only on issues of public policy or jurisdictional errors and cannot re-evaluate the merits of the aw....
Judicial review of arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration Act is significantly limited, focusing solely on jurisdictional errors or procedural irregularities with no reassessment....
Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the scope for setting aside an arbitral award under Sections 34 and 37 is limited, emphasizing the need for substantial legal grounds and deference to arbi....
The court reaffirmed that judicial intervention in arbitration under Sections 34 and 37 is limited to ensuring no substantial legal errors occurred, emphasizing the importance of respecting the arbit....
The court reaffirmed the limited scope of judicial review of arbitral awards under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing that courts cannot reappraise evidence or in....
(1) While exercising power under Section 34 of A & C Act, arbitral award can only be confirmed or set aside, but not modified.(2) Award passed by Arbitral Tribunal cannot be set aside on the ground t....
Judicial scrutiny under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is limited; courts must respect arbitral awards unless proven to violate public policy or statutory obligations, affirming the principle t....
(1) Appeal against modified arbitral award – Merits of award are only to be gone into, if award is demonstrated to be contrary to public policy of India.(2) Arbitral proceedings are per se not compar....
The court emphasized that judicial interference with arbitral awards under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is severely limited and cannot involve reevaluation of merits or factual findings.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.