Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SANDEEP V.MARNE
Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority – Appellant
Versus
Mumbai Metro One Private Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
THE CHALLENGE
1) By this Petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (Arbitration Act), Petitioner has challenged majority Award delivered by the three-member Arbitral Tribunal on 29 August 2023. The majority Award has allowed claims of the Respondents in the sum of about Rs. 496.48 crores along with interest. The Award directs Petitioner to pay to the Respondent Rs. 35 crores towards deductions made in the tranches of Viability Gap Fund alongwith interest. The Award directs Petitioner to pay to the Respondent amount of Rs. 13,16,00,000/- towards compensation for additional cost incurred on account of payment of rent for the land at Wadala together with interest. Petitioner is further directed to pay compensation of Rs.30,48,00,000/- towards construction of steel bridge instead of concrete bridge at Andheri Station alongwith interest. The Petitioner is further directed to pay to the Respondent amount of Rs.411,70,21,968/- towards increase in the cost of the Project. The Arbitral Award also holds Respondent entitled to extension of time for completion of Project upto 7 June 2011. The award grants pendent lite interest,
The court emphasized the requirement for the arbitrator to assign reasons in support of the award and the limited scope of interference by the court in arbitration awards.
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 upheld the arbitral tribunal's findings on delays caused by the Municipal Corporation but set aside the award for loss of profit due to insufficient evidence.
The court upheld the tribunal's award, concluding that the claims did not fall under 'excepted matters' and corroborated the contractor's entitlement to claims based on inadequate adjudication by the....
The judicial review under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act is restricted to issues of patent illegality, ensuring that arbitrator's findings are not disturbed unless they fundamenta....
The need for evidence to establish loss of profits and the court's discretion to modify the interest rate as agreed upon by the parties.
The main legal point established is that an arbitral award must be based on relevant material and evidence, and claims for loss of profit must be substantiated with evidence of missed opportunities.
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
