Back
VIBHU BAKHRU
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
NCC Limited – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Vibhu Bakhru, J. - I.A. 3836/2021 & I.A. 3840/2021
1. For the reasons stated in the application, the delay in filing as well as re-filing is condoned.
2. The application is disposed of.
I.A. 3837/2021 & I.A. 3838/2021
3. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
O.M.P. (COMM) 112/2021 & I.A. 3839/2021
4. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereafter the 'A&C Act'), impugning the interim award (hereafter 'the impugned award') passed by the Arbitral Tribunal comprising of a Sole Arbitrator. By the impugned award, the Arbitral Tribunal had directed that the Performance Bank Guarantee (Bank Guarantee No. 130391 BG 0000505) for a sum of Rs.15,06,31,160/-, furnished by the respondent (hereafter 'NCC') be returned to NCC, with the attendant direction to replace the same by a Bank Guarantee in the sum of Rs.1.5 crores.
5. The petitioner contends that the impugned award is patently illegal as it effectively dilutes the security available with the petitioner, to recover its counter-claims. According to the petitioner,
The main legal point established in the judgment is the limited scope of interference in Arbitral Awards and the importance of complying with contractual conditions, such as the submission of a No De....
The court upheld the arbitral award directing the release of the performance bank guarantee, finding all contractual requirements were satisfied and counter claims were untimely.
An interim order can restrain the encashment of bank guarantees pending arbitration if there is a risk of irreparable harm to the aggrieved party.
Point of Law : Arbitral Tribunal had erred in concluding that the petitioner had abandoned the works, is also unpersuasive. The finding that the petitioner had abandoned the works is a finding of fac....
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 ....
Arbitral awards are not subject to interference unless they exhibit patent illegality; the interpretation of contractual obligations falls within the jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal.
The court upheld the right to arbitration as per the terms of the contract, emphasizing the importance of adherence to contractual dispute resolution mechanisms.
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....
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....
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
