Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V. MARNE
Central Railway-Mumbai Division – Appellant
Versus
A-1 Laundry Services (JV) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. arbitration petition challenging the tribunal's award (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. petitioner's objections to the tribunal's award (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. respondent's defense against the petitioner's claims (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. court's analysis on claims and award confirmations (Para 12 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. judicial reasoning regarding tribunal exceeding contractual terms (Para 19 , 24 , 27 , 39 , 45) |
| 6. court's examination of delay penalties and contract terms (Para 30 , 31 , 33 , 38 , 46) |
| 7. final order on claims and petition resolution (Para 48 , 49 , 50) |
Sandeep V. Marne, J.
1) Petitioner-Central Railway has filed the present Petition under the provisions of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act) challenging the Award dated 7 March 2024 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal awarding sum of Rs.4,89,49,985/- in favour of the Respondent alongwith GST. The disputes between parties have arisen during performance of contract by the Respondent for collection of soiled linen from AC coaches, washing in mechanized laundry, supply and loading of washed linen into AC coaches. Out of various claims raised by the Respondent, the Arbitr
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....
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....
Court upheld the Arbitral Tribunal's decision based on the principle that interference is limited to cases of perversity, with findings deemed a plausible view of the evidence.
The non-breaching party is entitled to damages that place them in a position as if the contract had been performed, with the awarded loss of profits upheld based on reasonable calculations.
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....
The court can set aside an arbitral award under Section 34 if it violates substantive law, contract terms, or public policy, especially when procedural requirements aren't met or if the award is pate....
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
