Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V.MARNE
Signpost India Private Limited – Appellant
Versus
Brihan Mumbai Electric Supply And Transport Undertaking – Respondent
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
1) Petitioner has filed the present Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) challenging the Award dated 2 January 2024 passed by the learned sole Arbitrator. By the impugned Award, the learned sole Arbitrator has rejected all the claims made by the Petitioner. The counterclaim filed by the Respondent is allowed to the extent of sum of Rs. 49,60,063/- towards interest on delayed payment charges, Rs. 46,78,000/- towards RTO fees and Rs. 37,29,000/- towards defacement charges. The learned sole Arbitrator has also awarded costs of arbitral proceedings of Rs. 48,20,000/- in favour of the Respondent. The Arbitral Tribunal has awarded interest @ 18% per annum from 5 December 2022 i.e. date of filing of counterclaim till the date of Award and post Award interest @10% p.a.
2) Brief facts leading to filing of the Petition as pleaded by the Petitioner are stated thus :-
Petitioner is engaged in the business inter-alia of advertising. The Respondent -Brihanmumbai Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking (BEST) is a civic transport and electricity provider in Mumbai. Respondent-BEST operates a large fleet of buses in
Arbitral awards must strictly adhere to contractual obligations, exempting claims without explicit provisions, while interest on delayed payments cannot accrue as interest on interest under Indian la....
Termination of a contractual agreement during a lock-in period is invalid unless justified under specific contractual provisions, emphasizing the need to adhere to agreed terms for contract terminati....
The Court emphasized the limited scope of jurisdiction under Section 34 of the Act and the need for evidence to support claims for loss of profit.
An Arbitral Tribunal must adhere to explicit contractual terms without imposing external fairness standards, as such actions may result in rewriting the contract, which is impermissible under arbitra....
The court affirmed the limited scope of review under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing respect for arbitral awards unless stark violations of public policy or procedural....
Arbitral Tribunal has wide discretion in awarding interest and this Court is unable to accept that the award of interest at the rate of 18% is manifestly erroneous and warrants any interference in th....
The arbitral tribunal's decision to deny claims for damages due to lack of supporting evidence is valid under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, emphasizing minimal judicial interfer....
Court highlighted that interference with arbitral awards is limited, asserting that awards cannot be set aside merely due to merits but only if arbitrary, confirming the Arbitral Tribunal's authority....
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
