Back
VIBHU BAKHRU
National Highways Authority Of India – Appellant
Versus
UEM – Essar Joint Venture – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
VIBHU BAKHRU, J
1. The National Highway Authority of India (hereinafter ‘NHAI’) has filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter ‘the A&C Act’) impugning an arbitral award dated 01.09.2020 (hereinafter ‘the impugned award’) passed by an Arbitral Tribunal comprising of three members [Justice (Retd.) Iqbal Ahmed Ansari, Shri A.B. Desai, Chief Engineer and Justice (Retd.) C.K. Thakkar as the Presiding Arbitrator].
2. The impugned award was rendered in the context of disputes that had arisen between the parties in connection with the Agreement dated 16.01.2002. The principal dispute between the parties was regarding the respondent’s claim for payment of a sum of Rs.4,95,02,980/- for the works executed by it and certified by the Engineer appointed by NHAI. The majority of the Arbitrators [Shri A.B. Desai and Justice (Retd.) C.K. Thakkar] allowed the aforesaid claim, in favour of the respondent. The said learned Arbitrators also awarded interest in favour of the petitioner; however, there is a difference of opinion as
Execution of the works was delayed and the respondent sought Extension of Time for completion of the works on successive occasions, which were approved by NHAI.
The inapplicability of the ground of patent illegality to international commercial arbitration and the importance of interpreting specific contractual clauses in determining the validity of claims an....
An expulsion under a contract must have legitimate causes, and unjustified actions by one party render such expulsion illegal, reaffirming constraints under arbitration frameworks.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of Section 34 of the arbitration and Conciliation act, 1996 to an international commercial arbitration, and the ....
The arbitral Tribunal found NHaI's actions to expel the respondent from the site was unjustified and illegal based on various grounds, including the delay in granting Extension of Time (EOT) and the ....
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....
Statutory limitation under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act is strict and cannot be relaxed without sufficient justification; defective petitions lead to being treated as non-est.
The Arbitral Tribunal's decision falls within its jurisdiction and does not amount to patent illegality, as it was based on a plausible interpretation of the exclusionary clause in the contracts and ....
Failure to raise claims for escalation in a timely manner and acceptance of payments in full and final settlement preclude further claims.
The Arbitral Tribunal has considerable discretion in evaluating evidence and interpreting contract clauses, and its decision cannot be interfered with unless found to be patently illegal or in confli....
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
