Back
VIBHU BAKHRU
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
ACE Footmark Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
1. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (hereinafter ‘OICL’) has filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1966 (hereinafter the ‘A&C Act’), inter alia, impugning an Arbitral Award dated 28.08.2020 (hereafter the ‘impugned award’) passed by the Arbitral Tribunal constituted of Justice (Retd.) Kurian Joseph, a former judge of the Supreme Court of India as the sole arbitrator. The impugned award was rendered in the context of disputes relating to the insurance claims made by the respondent (hereinafter ‘AFPL’) under the insurance policy issued by OICL.
2. AFPL is a company engaged in the business of manufacture of footwear. AFPL had a valid “Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy (bearing policy number 510000/11/2018/483 with period of insurance commencing from 00:00 on 25.10.2017 to the midnight of 24.10.2018 – hereafter the ‘Policy’). In terms of the Policy, AIPL was insured against the specified risks for a sum of Rs.9,70,00,000.
3. On 09.12.2017, a fire broke out in AFPL’s manufacturing plant (bearing Plot No. 213, HSIID
Point of law: Arbitral Award -Courts should not interfere with an award merely because an alternative view on facts and interpretation of contract exists. The Courts need to be cautious and should de....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the deference to the learned Arbitrator's decisions based on a reasonable interpretation of facts and materials on record, as well as the entitleme....
Discharge vouchers signed by the claimant negate the maintainability of further claims, and courts will not interfere unless findings are arbitrary or perverse.
Point of law: Court is unable to accept that the impugned award suffers from any patent illegality that strikes at the root of the said matter. It is also not contrary to the fundamental policy of In....
Consent obtained under economic duress can invalidate contractual agreements in arbitration; courts respect arbitral awards barring serious legal flaws.
Execution of discharge voucher does not bar arbitration if validity challenged; tribunal decides jurisdiction under Kompetenz-Kompetenz.
The court annulled the arbitral award for misinterpretation of insurance policy terms, improper calculation of depreciation, and lack of independent reasoning in affirming mixed assessments for claim....
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
