Back
RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, AMIT BANSAL
Manikaran Power Limited – Appellant
Versus
Valuehunt Advisors LLP – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J. - This appeal, under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, impugns the judgment dated 5th December, 2020 of the Commercial Court - 02, Patiala House Court, New Delhi of dismissal of OMP (COMM) 60/2019 under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act, preferred by the appellant with respect to the arbitral award dated 17th December, 2018, of payment of Rs. 24,75,000/- with interest, by the appellant to the respondent.
2. The appeal came up before a Single Judge of this Court on 16th December, 2020, but after several adjournments, was ordered to be placed before the Commercial Appellate Division Bench, which alone under Section 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 is authorised to hear the appeal. The appeal accordingly came up before a Bench comprising of one of us (Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J.) sitting with Justice Sanjeev Narula, on 1st February, 2021 when, though notice of the appeal had not been issued till then, but the counsel for the respondent appeared on advance notice.
3. On 1st February, 2021, on enquiry, whether the appellant had deposited the arbitral award amount, this Court was informed that only 25% of the amount had been deposit
The judgment emphasizes the limited scope of interference under Section 37 of the Arbitration Act, highlighting the importance of abiding by arbitral awards and the need for commercial parties to hon....
The courts have a limited scope of interference under Section 34 and 37 of the Arbitration Act, and the Arbitral Tribunal's detailed consideration of evidence and claims is final.
The court emphasized that arbitral awards should not be interfered with solely based on disagreements with findings, affirming the limited grounds for appeal under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
The court confirmed that judicial interference in arbitral awards is limited to cases of patent illegality or perverse findings, respecting the finality of arbitration.
Point of law: Arbitration Award - It must clearly be understood that when a court is applying the "public policy" test to an arbitration award, it does not act as a court of appeal and consequently e....
The judgment emphasizes the narrow scope of interference with an arbitral award and the principle of waiver in raising new grounds on appeal.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of interference under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and the importance of interpreting the contract a....
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
