Back
D. V. S. S. SOMAYAJULU, V. SRINIVAS
Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited – Appellant
Versus
Tarachand Logistics Solutions Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT
D.V.S.S.SOMAYAJULU, J. - This appeal is filed by the respondent in the Arbitration who is also the unsuccessful petitioner to a challenge under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short 'the Act') before the Commercial Court, Visakhapatnam.
2. The appellant is the Rashtriya Ispat Nigam Limited (RINL). It awarded a handling contract of its Mumbai Branch to the 1st respondent on 22/4/2006 for a period of seven years, which ended on 21/4/2013. Since the new tender for work after 2013 was not finalized in time, there were correspondence between the appellant and the 1st respondent leading to an extension of contract. This also led to a dispute which was referred to a three member arbitration panel, which ultimately gave its award dtd. 16/7/2017 in favour of the respondent herein (Contractor). An application under Sec. 34 of the Act was filed before the Commercial Court, Visakhapatnam against the award, which was dismissed. Questioning the same, the present appeal is filed.
3. This Court has heard Sri W.B.Srinivas, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri Kotireddy Idamakanti appearing for the respondents.
4. Learned senior counsel appear
The limited grounds for interference with an award under Sec. 37 and the supervisory nature of jurisdiction under Sec. 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Arbitration awards may be set aside if contrary to public policy or fundamental legal principles, emphasizing the importance of adhering to contractual terms regarding extensions and compensations.
The Court's power while exercising jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Act is limited, and it cannot undertake an independent assessment on the merits of the Award.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal must be based on evidence and material on record, and the Court will not interfere with the award unless....
An arbitral tribunal cannot adjudicate on claims outside the scope of the arbitration agreement, and awards violating explicit contractual terms are subject to being set aside under Section 34 of the....
The Court upheld the AT's findings regarding the attribution of delay, enforcement of NOC, and the allowance of the claim for escalation cost without a specific clause in the Contract, based on the n....
An arbitrator may award escalated costs due to employer delay despite prohibitory clauses, reinforcing that delays affecting contractor performance can lead to compensatory claims.
An arbitrator's award may be upheld if it conforms to contract terms, despite challenges regarding procedural compliance or interpretation, provided it does not contravene public policy.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
